How City cheat FFP

Originally Posted by Knockers

Sorry but all this just makes me wish even more that they owned us. They’re using piles of money to become the best football team in the world and are ploughing millions into Manchester while they’re at it. If you ignore the fact it’s City then you have to take your hat off to them.

Seriously? Why should rerouting money to breach regulations (however flawed they might be) be applauded?

Do you think they give a £#%&! about regenerating Manchester? Are you seriously suggesting that if a clear breach of FFP is established, it should be ignored and we should just wish it was us in the same position? This is not nhye Don I know and love!

We don't even need owners like those @#%&!s. Then we look at the @#%&!s we do have.

This shit is £#%&!ed up. Their being shit got them great owners, our being great got us £#%&!ing horrible owners.

Originally Posted by Knockers

Sorry but all this just makes me wish even more that they owned us. They’re using piles of money to become the best football team in the world and are ploughing millions into Manchester while they’re at it. If you ignore the fact it’s City then you have to take your hat off to them.

Take your hat off to them for breaking the rules which all other clubs have to abide by and therefore denying other legitimately run football clubs a top 4 finish and by extension deny them the money to improve their clubs?

This is a sport at the end of the day, and if we aren't all playing by the same rules then what's the £#%&!ing point in it?

Surprised Rubin Kazan haven't started kicking up a fuss yet.

2 year ban for overspending by just 8m or something.

"Just 8m" btw

Originally Posted by Part 36 Offer

Seriously? Why should rerouting money to breach regulations (however flawed they might be) be applauded?

Do you think they give a £#%&! about regenerating Manchester? Are you seriously suggesting that if a clear breach of FFP is established, it should be ignored and we should just wish it was us in the same position? This is not nhye Don I know and love!

A up, the lawyers are in.....

Hard to see two bro's fall out like this.....I'm kind of with knockers in a way, I'm struggling to actually give a £#%&!....

Surprised the vermin aren’t foaming & phlegming (well, more than normal) at the mouth over this.

They’ll be demanding they retrospectively get a League title.

Originally Posted by Fat Al

Surprised the vermin aren’t foaming & phlegming (well, more than normal) at the mouth over this.

They’ll be demanding they retrospectively get a League title.

They get 1, we get 2

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

It’s not just football. It’s everything. And always has been. The internet is just making it slightly more visible to more people.

This, and that is why so many EXTREMELY SENSIBLE CENTRIST types want it silenced.

Originally Posted by Knockers

Sorry but all this just makes me wish even more that they owned us. They’re using piles of money to become the best football team in the world and are ploughing millions into Manchester while they’re at it. If you ignore the fact it’s City then you have to take your hat off to them.

£#%&!ing Hell

Hook, line and sinker.

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

This, and that is why so many EXTREMELY SENSIBLE CENTRIST types want it silenced.

Extremely sensible what?

Is there any chance you can post on one thread without regurgitating what you've ready in 'basement dwelling plastic antifa monthly' and 'identity politics for morons'?

Originally Posted by Sparky***

Extremely sensible what?

Is there any chance you can post on one thread without regurgitating what you've ready in 'basement dwelling plastic antifa monthly' and 'identity politics for morons'?

You must have me confused with somebody else on here, I am no "identity politics" enthusiast and never have been.

(indeed, that is often the preserve of centrists these days too)

But yes, back to football

FFP wasn't ever a massive conspiracy to stop them either, it was supposed to stop clubs running up huge debts (wouldn't have stopped our £#%&!ing stupid debt but then we never £#%&!ing ran it up did we)

They've just bullied and bribed til they get what they want, it's what they do.

Paul Wilson writing about how United would be champions with Pep, but sneers that Mourinho would probably have got City past liverpool last season with a boring nil nil.

Why write about the Der Speigel articles when he can put the boot into Mourinho instead?

Pretty much sums up our media and unless there's something incendiary in the final part tomorrow they'll continue to ignore it.

He writes it because he knows its what the ABUs want.

Originally Posted by andyroo

FFP wasn't ever a massive conspiracy to stop them either, it was supposed to stop clubs running up huge debts (wouldn't have stopped our £#%&!ing stupid debt but then we never £#%&!ing ran it up did we)

They've just bullied and bribed til they get what they want, it's what they do.

If we’re honest, FFP was a little bit about the maintenance of the big clubs’ hegemony...

Originally Posted by Sapien

If we’re honest, FFP was a little bit about the maintenance of the big clubs’ hegemony...

From one point of view. And ‘a little bit’ being key there. From another, it wasn’t. It’s as much about protecting clubs like city and PSG should their owner £#%&! off.

FFP doesn’t stop an owner spending as much money as they want on things like infrastructure in order to grow the club over time. It limits them in a couple of ways in terms of spending on transfers and wages, and does so justly. It helps protect the competitiveness of the competition, reduces upwards pressure on transfer and wage markets, reduces pressure on clubs with limited budgets to stretch themselves financially trying to compete, and protects the financial sustainability of clubs like city and PSG in the event the owner £#%&!s off.

Anyone arguing the rule is unfair or illegal because it’s anti-competitive is a £#%&!wit or has a vested interest.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

From one point of view. And ‘a little bit’ being key there. From another, it wasn’t. It’s as much about protecting clubs like city and PSG should their owner £#%&! off.

FFP doesn’t stop an owner spending as much money as they want on things like infrastructure. It limits them in a couple of ways in terms of spending on transfers and wages, and does so justly. It helps protect the competitiveness of the competition, reduces upwards pressure on transfer and wage markets, reduces pressure on clubs with limited budgets to stretch themselves financially trying to compete, and protects the financial sustainability of clubs like city and PSG in the event the owner £#%&!s off.

I wasn’t aware of that actually. That does put a different slant on it, I agree.

Originally Posted by andyroo

FFP wasn't ever a massive conspiracy to stop them either

Even if it was, it's fair enough. Nobody likes a lottery winning chav. They've bought their way into the club and they're ruining the atmos. Their vulgarity need not be tolerated.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

From one point of view. And ‘a little bit’ being key there. From another, it wasn’t. It’s as much about protecting clubs like city and PSG should their owner £#%&! off.

FFP doesn’t stop an owner spending as much money as they want on things like infrastructure in order to grow the club over time. It limits them in a couple of ways in terms of spending on transfers and wages, and does so justly. It helps protect the competitiveness of the competition, reduces upwards pressure on transfer and wage markets, reduces pressure on clubs with limited budgets to stretch themselves financially trying to compete, and protects the financial sustainability of clubs like city and PSG in the event the owner £#%&!s off.

Anyone arguing the rule is unfair or illegal because it’s anti-competitive is a £#%&!wit or has a vested interest.

Agreed.

Who are you and what have you done with Jammy Dodger?

The final article, detailing how City circumvented FFP rules to pay Mancini's salary.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1236622.html