2022/2023 Manchester City Thread: A very important announcment

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
8,962
So they mailed a kit to his house, let him take some selfies for the press release? Anything to stay within FFP, i guess.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,283
Of course, Pep will play him as a wing in some weird alignment during next year's Champions League semi-final that will cause us to fall short again.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
9,283
Haaland at City is a cheat code. Just hand him the Golden Boot.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,492
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
It’s obvious he’s going to score bucket loads of goals - Salah’s league record will probably be obliterated by April.

But the thing is - how many more goals will the team score?

Edit: whistling past the graveyard
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,563
Philadelphia
I did not have Mendy getting not-guilty verdicts on all charges in the 2023 prediction pool (although it looks like two charges might go back to trial after some sort of hung jury situation).

No idea what happened in the trial, he had a ton of accusers. These cases are notoriously hard to prosecute but still, wow.
 

SocrManiac

Tommy Seebach’s mustache
SoSH Member
Apr 15, 2006
8,721
Somers, CT
Is this the sporting equivalent of stating the obvious?

It would be counterproductive forthe FA’s finances to counter these tactics, but it Citeh are curb stomped (followed by the other unsustainable oil clubs) maybe the playing field can be leveled again.
 

Snedds

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2007
175
Wales
They should be looking at a relegation and transfer ban for a couple of years as punishment for all these charges, if the rules are to have any purpose.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,563
Philadelphia
They will appeal and drag out the process but this looks pretty serious. The number of charges is very high, the PL wouldn’t do that if they wanted to give them a fine and move on.
 

Pesky Pole

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
2,581
Phoenixville, PA
Part of me wonders if they are finally acting with the new Newcastle ownership and pending takeovers of Man United and Liverpool. Sort of a last chance to do something meaningful before a chasm opens.
 

bosox4283

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 2, 2004
4,715
Philadelphia
Is this the sporting equivalent of stating the obvious?
Was there no oversight for a decade? In a like with 20 teams, it’s not like it’s hard to observe who is doing what and when a line may be crossed. I agree with the poster who wrote that the timing suggests something bigger, a more strategic play.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,247
Chelmsford, MA
Was there no oversight for a decade? In a like with 20 teams, it’s not like it’s hard to observe who is doing what and when a line may be crossed. I agree with the poster who wrote that the timing suggests something bigger, a more strategic play.
The UK government have been proposing a commission on regulating football of some sorts and this may well be the PL trying to keep the government out

Having said that, I’m completely exhausted of this topic. It’s very likely a stitch up, like the last one was, but if I learned anything the last time it’s that fans of other clubs just aren’t capable of coming at this topic with anything but their biases. The Prem have been after City for years and got their headline today with “100 charges” and there is literally nothing City can do which will not result in my spending hours typing words absolutely nobody will ever pay any attention to. It sucks but that CAS case was as much of a full exoneration as you’ll ever see and years later it’s still all “you got by on a technicality”

It seems this investigation will be led by someone from Arsenal and he gets to pick who is on the board , so that is lovely. Whatever will be will be. 30 of the 100 charges are for non compliance with the investigation, supposedly, so we will probably at least get in trouble again for not participating in an unfair process, which will be used by fans of other clubs as a reason to claim it was all cheating anyway.

I have said many times that I don’t think any club is completely clean. Chelsea got caught with some dealings on youth players and City have had a similar model so there could be something there. Cancelo deal was fishy and with Juve taking a hit there could be something there as well. The accusation, though, of widespread financial fraud means that some of the most audited accounts in the history of football by both internal and external auditors has been lacking. That has happened before in other corporate scandals but I hope the PL is aware of what it is accusing some very big companies of doing. If this case turns out again to be innuendo, hacked emails, and interpretations of rules then I think the PL itself has made a huge mistake
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,563
Philadelphia
Having said that, I’m completely exhausted of this topic. It’s very likely a stitch up, like the last one was, but if I learned anything the last time it’s that fans of other clubs just aren’t capable of coming at this topic with anything but their biases. The Prem have been after City for years and got their headline today with “100 charges” and there is literally nothing City can do which will not result in my spending hours typing words absolutely nobody will ever pay any attention to. It sucks but that CAS case was as much of a full exoneration as you’ll ever see and years later it’s still all “you got by on a technicality”
Mr. Pot, let me introduce you to Mr. Kettle.

As far as this being a ploy to undercut the notion of an independent regulator, that idea just doesn't hold any water whatsoever. The investigation has been going on for four years, they're not just making up something in the last week because a government white paper is dropping soon. And there's no better way to ensure an independent regulator than conducting a sham investigation of one of the league's biggest and most powerful clubs, with the best lawyers money can buy,, that proves to be a sham once the details are revealed.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,247
Chelmsford, MA
Mr. Pot, let me introduce you to Mr. Kettle.

As far as this being a ploy to undercut the notion of an independent regulator, that idea just doesn't hold any water whatsoever. The investigation has been going on for four years, they're not just making up something in the last week because a government white paper is dropping soon. And there's no better way to ensure an independent regulator than conducting a sham investigation of one of the league's biggest and most powerful clubs, with the best lawyers money can buy,, that proves to be a sham once the details are revealed.
Earnestly, I’m not doing this again. The only clarification I’ll make is that the independent regulator may be more of a “why now” than a “why ever” but the league may feel pressure to bring something and had this investigation ongoing.

I’m sure everyone will enjoy whatever this turns out to be. If you want the perspective of a City fan I’m just giving it to you: it’s clear we can’t and won’t ever win. The damage has already been done. I’ll be surprised if the PL has anything major but they’ll find something they can make stick with a friendly panel and there will be some punishment and that will be that.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
22,855
Pittsburgh, PA
They should be looking at a relegation and transfer ban for a couple of years as punishment for all these charges, if the rules are to have any purpose.
Yeah, there's (Allegedly) intentional deception on the terms of sponsorship deals, salaries paid to club staff, etc. Pushing the envelope within the rules is one thing, and we can lament that but it's categorically different than straight-up lying to your regulators. Both of those things should be on the table, as Juventus can tell them.

The challenge of course will be the fact that CAS overturned their previous 2-year UCL ban, so everyone involved needs to operate with the assumption that CAS will prevent any sanctions from having any teeth. I'm sure City and PSG are upping their monthly retainers to CAS's judges as we speak.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,453
If you want the perspective of a City fan I’m just giving it to you: it’s clear we can’t and won’t ever win.
But you did win. A lot.

They can take away things on paper, but you watched and celebrated on the field.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,247
Chelmsford, MA
But you did win. A lot.

They can take away things on paper, but you watched and celebrated on the field.
Yes, and I supported City before any of this happened so it doesn’t much matter to me.

I’m sure the PL will be refunding Sky and all the international broadcasters money for the Agueroooooo moment and the increased value that came from it all
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
22,855
Pittsburgh, PA
The UK government have been proposing a commission on regulating football of some sorts and this may well be the PL trying to keep the government out

Having said that, I’m completely exhausted of this topic. It’s very likely a stitch up, like the last one was, but if I learned anything the last time it’s that fans of other clubs just aren’t capable of coming at this topic with anything but their biases. The Prem have been after City for years and got their headline today with “100 charges” and there is literally nothing City can do which will not result in my spending hours typing words absolutely nobody will ever pay any attention to. It sucks but that CAS case was as much of a full exoneration as you’ll ever see and years later it’s still all “you got by on a technicality”

It seems this investigation will be led by someone from Arsenal and he gets to pick who is on the board , so that is lovely. Whatever will be will be. 30 of the 100 charges are for non compliance with the investigation, supposedly, so we will probably at least get in trouble again for not participating in an unfair process, which will be used by fans of other clubs as a reason to claim it was all cheating anyway.

I have said many times that I don’t think any club is completely clean. Chelsea got caught with some dealings on youth players and City have had a similar model so there could be something there. Cancelo deal was fishy and with Juve taking a hit there could be something there as well. The accusation, though, of widespread financial fraud means that some of the most audited accounts in the history of football by both internal and external auditors has been lacking. That has happened before in other corporate scandals but I hope the PL is aware of what it is accusing some very big companies of doing. If this case turns out again to be innuendo, hacked emails, and interpretations of rules then I think the PL itself has made a huge mistake
Several things can be true at once.

For example, just because they're out to get you doesn't mean you've done nothing wrong ("you" in this case being "Manchester City FC").

Or, just because other clubs are likely dirty doesn't mean you're clean, and doesn't mean that there's no value in the PL trying to make an example out of someone, perhaps the most-egregious case.

That said, I will offer my own two cents:
  • Whether this is the PL trying to keep the government out, or simply revealing the need for the government to be in, either way, the government needs to be in.
  • The best way for the government to be in, if they actually want to fix this, is to institute something akin to Germany's 50%+1 rule. Which is that a nonprofit composed of club membership independent from the operators and financial interests of the football first team, must have a majority on the ultimate decision-making authority body. And they can appoint another entity (such as CFG Ltd) to operate the first team and take whatever-percentage of profits from it, but the ultimate responsibility (and legal liability) rests with people who are not those operators.
  • If they don't do this, even a substantial penalty like relegation and transfer bans will just be a band-aid on a gaping wound; the other clubs they'd have to investigate and deal with likewise might as well be queueing up. And sooner or later the appetite for doing so will wane, because the whole thing will resemble some wheel-of-justice nonsense. Even if it was deserved in whichever particular cases are brought. So a systemic change is the only thing that will alter the incentive structure that City is (alleged to be) abusing.
  • The PL is composed of the 20 current-member clubs; it is barely an entity unto itself independent of those clubs. So somebody akin to "someone from Arsenal" was always going to be leading the process of the investigation. There's scarcely a club in the league that you couldn't have labeled with that same withering innuendo as you did, implying bias simply by affiliation. I am unpersuaded that they are incapable of being sufficiently impartial, because club-affiliated people are the only ones to draw from.
  • Your last sentence is indeed true, that if this case is smoke with no fire, it will have cost a lot of credibility and will look like sour grapes. But I think that to be rather unlikely given what we've all seen of City the last decade and the breadth of the accusations. And these cases, as we know from the real justice system when it comes to white-collar crime, are notoriously hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Which is why people giving you the "technicality" stuff from the CAS appeal are not just Trumpian haters-and-losers; their standards of proof are just a bit lower than that in a courtroom.
It's unlikely that European football will ever be on something resembling financial parity of US sports leagues; the fans largely don't want it, not really, and there's no real mechanism to create it. But stretching a financial advantage to the point where the disparity isn't 20%, 50%, but rather 7-to-1 (payroll Man U £ 212M to Brentford £ 30M) makes a mockery of the idea of fair competition. Much as the Mets are doing in MLB.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,453
The challenge of course will be the fact that CAS overturned their previous 2-year UCL ban, so everyone involved needs to operate with the assumption that CAS will prevent any sanctions from having any teeth. I'm sure City and PSG are upping their monthly retainers to CAS's judges as we speak.
Does CAS have jurisdiction here? I’ve seen some reporting that since it is the EPL bringing the charges, rather than UEFA, there’s no appeal to CAS, but I have no idea if that’s right or not.
View: https://twitter.com/martynziegler/status/1622566005074456576

Martyn Ziegler
@martynziegler

Follow
Man City latest: under Premier League rules the club will not be able to appeal any sanction to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (which overturned the UEFA ban)
6:00 AM · Feb 6, 2023
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
22,855
Pittsburgh, PA
Interesting. I'm of two minds whether that's a good thing, if true.

On the one hand, rights-of-appeal are generally good things for the cause of justice, partly because they persuade the public that justice is done fairly.

On the other hand, my generally high regard for CAS has been substantially lessened by several cases in just the last few years, from the Russian doping scandal to the City case here. So i'm not sure I'd want them to be the appellate tribunal anyway (per my snark above).

On the third hand, clubs being able to sue their league has a somewhat fraught history. It was the undoing of a great many early soccer leagues in the US, to say nothing of Al Davis vs the NFL and various suits between MLB and its clubs over the years. Clubs being able to get their way by being willing to take everyone else down with them and waste many millions of dollars threatening the stability of their leagues is probably not a good ability to leave totally unfettered.

I wonder if City has some sort of right-of-action under the UK court system, regardless of what the PL rules say.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,453
Guess the sanctions?

15 points, no continental tourneys for 3 years, fine of some ridiculous sum?

All of that?

There's no way they relegate them.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,912
Washington, DC
  • The best way for the government to be in, if they actually want to fix this, is to institute something akin to Germany's 50%+1 rule. Which is that a nonprofit composed of club membership independent from the operators and financial interests of the football first team, must have a majority on the ultimate decision-making authority body. And they can appoint another entity (such as CFG Ltd) to operate the first team and take whatever-percentage of profits from it, but the ultimate responsibility (and legal liability) rests with people who are not those operators
Having a club run by members may be a way to avoid private investors taking over clubs and pushing through measures that prioritise profit over the wishes of supporters (so avoiding under-spending), and it probably avoids financial shell company shenanigans, but I'm not convinced that it always leads to financial prudence. Isn't Barcelona largely run by the socis appointing the board? Feels like fans might be willing to authorize spending beyond a club's means on the hope that it results in better results, qualification for Europe, and increased revenue.

To be clear, I think the Germany rule works when we're talking about German teams run by German fans - I'm just not sure the structure works independent of the cultural context.
 

Joe D Reid

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
4,250
Can the PL even control who UEFA invites for its competitions? (I don't know the answer to that)
It seems like all of these proposed sanctions are PL-imposed and have a direct effect only on the domestic league. So while that may have downstream effects on qualifying for UEFA competitions, it is different from UEFA itself directly banning them like last time.

Now, CAS's jurisdiction is deeply, deeply unclear to me, so I don't know whether that genuinely makes a difference. But I think it is the basis for what the PL is putting out there.
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
8,962
Ah, delicious.

IIRC, the UEFA charges against City were originally some ex post facto type shit about accounting and booking fees/sponsorships in the early days of FFP. That case collapsed into a fine, but UEFA returned after the Football Leaks to prosecute City for misleading UEFA investigators during the original failed prosecution. And that's the case CAS threw out.

UEFA is Keystone Cops. But as long as PSG openly flout every FFP rule and guideline, UEFA can fuck all the way off.

We'll have to learn more about the substance and evidence behind these new charges. The EPL is a different beast than UEFA and different political calculations. but what they've made public now indicates they want to drop the hammer.
 
Last edited:

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
22,855
Pittsburgh, PA
Having a club run by members may be a way to avoid private investors taking over clubs and pushing through measures that prioritise profit over the wishes of supporters (so avoiding under-spending), and it probably avoids financial shell company shenanigans, but I'm not convinced that it always leads to financial prudence. Isn't Barcelona largely run by the socis appointing the board? Feels like fans might be willing to authorize spending beyond a club's means on the hope that it results in better results, qualification for Europe, and increased revenue.

To be clear, I think the Germany rule works when we're talking about German teams run by German fans - I'm just not sure the structure works independent of the cultural context.
It's a fair question and a reasonable thing to doubt. I don't know whether truly independent boards would result in financial prudence. But if the biggest and most immediate problem is the financial shell-games and misrepresentations. UAE government higher-ups like Mubarak won't worry about legal liability from the UK; but an independent board run by local brits, whose financial oversight subcommittee has to sign on the dotted line, I expect would.

Moreover, fans who don't stand to see the financial upside of going-for-broke on overspending (just the team-rooting enjoyment upside), and who are operating collectively rather than hierarchically, I think human psychology suggests they'd be more conservative. Sufficiently so? Who knows. But everything we know about corporate boards says that they will act firstly to preserve their own longevity serving on that board - and they're more likely to get turfed out for operating the club Barcelona-piggy-bank style than they would be emulating the practices of, say, Bournemouth.

If you've got better ideas for sustainable and responsible governance in English football, I assure you I'm all ears.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,334
I find it hard to believe that corruption could be this wide spread and going on for so long in such a pure and noble sport.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
22,563
Philadelphia
Can the PL even control who UEFA invites for its competitions? (I don't know the answer to that)
I think they'd have to do it by manipulating their league finishes via point deductions. With a big enough point deduction for 22-23 and 23-24, the PL can effectively keep them out of Europe for two years if they want.

Calciopoli punishments involved both retrospective and prospective point deductions.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
24,677
The 718
Review charges; adapt language in client communications accordingly. .1 hrs
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
8,492
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
One of the indirect penalties will be that Pep leaves - whenever this finally is sorted. He has said he would if he thinks City lied to him.

I’m not sure how lawyering up is really going to help City. The Prem. will have very well documented, specific charges to answer. And the “non cooperation” ones are presumably impossible to answer. For example - “please provide evidence that sponsorship X was actually worth the £20m you claimed” . especially if they simply obfuscated , dodged and weaved.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,710
California. Duh.
Unless Steven Gerrard is retroactively awarded the 2014 Premier League title and Teddy personally apologizes for his 374 slip-related jokes since then, I don't see this really changing much for me.