Man City found guilty of 114/115 charges

2»

Comments

  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    edited September 28
    Unless the fine is in the region of tens of billions it won’t have any impact. This has been going on for years and it’s naive to believe that the players weren’t aware that something really dodgy wasn’t going on but were happy to continue taking their vast wages and bathing in the plaudits for winning everything.
    They believed, like as been said on here, that City are too important to the PL.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    I haven’t read much into the details of the charges or how they compare to Everton’s but I think wherever they are comparable, City have to get a points deduction on the same scale. Everton could have got relegated and it would stink if City don’t get the same treatment. I don’t think changing past winners and stripping titles means much if the current team basically gets to continue like normal.
  • WhitehorsehammerWhitehorsehammer
    If it is a relatively small points deduction Everton and Notts Forest will have a complaint, if they got a 2 points deduction for one breach than 2 x 114 = lots.
  • alderzalderz
    Whilst I understand that some people don't think the rules that were broken should be in place, the fact is that (nearly) every other team played by the rules and didn't get the advantages of breaking the rules. I think they should be thrown out of the league, personally. A points deduction does nothing because at worst it would mean one relegation, immediate promotion, and then carry on as if it never happened. That level of punishment would not deter others from breaking rules too. I'm not sure how their owners can be deemed 'fit and proper' after this.
  • OutcastLondonerOutcastLondoner
    Whitehorsehammer said:

    If it is a relatively small points deduction Everton and Notts Forest will have a complaint, if they got a 2 points deduction for one breach than 2 x 114 = lots.

    I think not so many of the charges are related to the PSR like Everton’s so it’s not as straight forward as multiplying by 114, but those that are should get the same treatment. Then the addition of whatever’s a suitable punishment for the other charges.

    I do also feel the best thing would be to throw them down to the bottom of the pyramid. But I also feel like while we (rightfully) criticise Man City, Chelsea got away with a lot. I see things saying Man City changed football, but I think it’s just an extension of what Chelsea did
  • jay_in_cptjay_in_cpt
    A fine to a club owned by such wealthy people means nothing...
    I feel for the fans, always the innocent ones who lose out......
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Someone suggested that City should be made the start at the bottom like Rangers in 2012

    The obvious problem is that unlike the Scottish Leagues the Premier League and Football League are seperate so there is no bottom to start from
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    edited September 28
    I suppose they could get kicked out of the PL and have to apply to join the EFL who could then reject their application and make them apply to the National League, unlikely, or accept and enter them in League 2.
    Any of these options would involve a realignment of the PL and whatever league they are put in.
  • Brother_SledgeBrother_Sledge
    The problem with awarding a cup to the runner up would not recognise teams that were knocked out by Man City in earlier rounds who may otherwise have gone on to win it.
  • alderzalderz
    I think they can take honours away from them, but they can't really award them to others in any meaningful way.
  • Expat_HammerExpat_Hammer
    thornburyiron said:

    I suppose they could get kicked out of the PL and have to apply to join the EFL who could then reject their application and make them apply to the National League, unlikely, or accept and enter them in League 2.

    Just imagine the reading the results of a Saturday afternoon,
    Dog & Duck 2nd XI 0 - Manchester City 72 =)
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    They should mark all their titles with an asterisk, as they do for example in Baseball is found guilty of drug taking. Their records stand but the asterisk ensures everyone knows they are unsafe.
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    If they get this right they will stop the problem. They probably already did however just by charging them as Newcastle probably demonstrates. Chelsea came spent all they wanted and won everything, City did the same, but then Newcastle didn't. This said I wouldn't be surprised if Chelsea get in trouble again with their spend from a couple of years ago.
  • Giant_HammerGiant_Hammer
    I can foresee a problem if they merely relegate city to the championship as if they bounce straight back the club who would’ve finished second were it not for city would finish third, be forced into the playoffs and if they are beaten and miss promotion would have a case against, oh I don’t know, whoever. If you get my drift please explain it to me as I’ve just confused the hell out of myself. =)
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    edited September 28
    They couldn't do a relegation mid-season.

    I know your comment wasn't wholly serious, giant.

  • ScotHammerScotHammer
    ASLEFshrugged said:

    Someone suggested that City should be made the start at the bottom like Rangers in 2012

    The obvious problem is that unlike the Scottish Leagues the Premier League and Football League are seperate so there is no bottom to start from

    It was me! When Rangers were thrown out of the SPL it was separate to:the Scottish League (although you’re correct in saying it is all one now). They then had to reapply for membership of the Scottish League, and were readmitted right at the bottom (of League 2).

    They’ll always be someone unhappy with any possible punishment , but seems better than a fine(?). ⚒

    ……… maybe we’ll be seeing the Gallagher brothers in smaller stadiums next year!
  • KuchinghammerKuchinghammer
    Nobody has mentioned agents in all of this . If they were held liable, in the same way as “assisting or enabling a crime” is, then transfers would suddenly become more Honest.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    How would agents be liable?

    They represent the players, its not their responsibility to check the club's accounts to see if they are following the rules

    That's purely between the club and the Premier League, FA, whatever
  • WhitehorsehammerWhitehorsehammer
    If Man City have "irrefutable evidence" of their innocence why did they not to present this to the Premier League before, is not that they didn't have time, something like eight years.
  • alderzalderz
    Whitehorsehammer said:

    If Man City have "irrefutable evidence" of their innocence why did they not to present this to the Premier League before, is not that they didn't have time, something like eight years.

    They did. All reporting is that it’s evidence they’ve already provided, but are claiming it was ignored. Most sensible people would assume that , as the evidence was refuted , it is not irrefutable.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Plus their “irrefutable” evidence was used in an exactly opposite defence to the US treasury.
  • KuchinghammerKuchinghammer
    ASLEFshrugged said:

    How would agents be liable?

    They represent the players, its not their responsibility to check the club's accounts to see if they are following the rules

    That's purely between the club and the Premier League, FA, whatever

    So you are arguing that they didn’t know about double contracts etc? They knew, they were aware it was dodgy, And they encouraged the players to go along eith it.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Double contracts?

    The only "double contract" I've read about was Roberto Mancini being employed as an adviser for a club Sheikh Mansour owned in Abu Dhabi while he was City's manager

    Don't see what that has got to do with the agents or players
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmq5nljx7972o

    An attempt to guesstimate financial impact on other teams.
Sign In or Register to comment.