• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

City banned from Europe, Twwwwiiiiiicccceeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dont want be be handed title by default. If they (and they wont) stripe city of the title then fine, just leave it like that. No winner.
Would it open another can of worms if we were then awarded the title because then doesnt the amount of money that a club gets from the tv pool change as per your top 4 position. Could open all sorts of legal cases for compensation
 
It obviously isn't going to happen, but if we were to be retrospectively handed a title, could we sue Cheaty for denying us the joy of celebrating the win? What about gamblers that backed Liverpool for the title? I would love to kick the tw@s over and over again while they are down.
 
I'd defo take being retrospectively handed a couple of league titles. How far back could it go? We could end up with 21 league titles.
 
Dont want be be handed title by default. If they (and they wont) stripe city of the title then fine, just leave it like that. No winner.
Would it open another can of worms if we were then awarded the title because then doesnt the amount of money that a club gets from the tv pool change as per your top 4 position. Could open all sorts of legal cases for compensation

I do.

It won't happen, but I do.
 
I was hoping it would start from last season !
As they were breaking the rules last season, all their trophies should be rescinded. Watford should get the FA Cup and we should be league champions. Chelsea should get the league cup. That's what happens when athletes are caught cheating - why should this be any different?
 
As they were breaking the rules last season, all their trophies should be rescinded. Watford should get the FA Cup and we should be league champions. Chelsea should get the league cup. That's what happens when athletes are caught cheating - why should this be any different?
You've read my other post haven't you? Come on - own up like a gentleman.
 
No champions league means 100% concentration on the premiership & maybe peps last season??

Despite the ridiculous response from City which is highly insulting to the legal side of UEFA I doubt very much the decision will withstand the appeal.

World cup in Qatar anyone?

The influx of money into football has caused extraordinary corruption and nonsensical spending but UEFA will not let it stand, what happens next? PSG spending 230M on Mbappe after buying Neymar? Because the French league is so lucrative obviously....

the ripple effects on the footy transfer market would be extraordinary, I doubt UEFA will close the door to cash from the Middle East.... I don’t believe it....
 
Banned from CL for 2 years and relegated to the Championship with a 25 point deduction from the start of the season.

That’ll do it - see how many of their mercenaries hang around for that.
 
Simply rescind the titles won during the periods where offences occurred. City to repay prize monies awarded. No need to re-award titles, just list those title years as annulled. Nobody wants a second hand title.

Then take a lead from the Rugby Union authorities and relegate the offending club.

Should act as a suitable deterrent and is proportional.
 
Despite the ridiculous response from City which is highly insulting to the legal side of UEFA I doubt very much the decision will withstand the appeal.

World cup in Qatar anyone?

The influx of money into football has caused extraordinary corruption and nonsensical spending but UEFA will not let it stand, what happens next? PSG spending 230M on Mbappe after buying Neymar? Because the French league is so lucrative obviously....

the ripple effects on the footy transfer market would be extraordinary, I doubt UEFA will close the door to cash from the Middle East.... I don’t believe it....

H-1eHj.gif
 
Just keep them out of Champs League for 2 seasons would be more the enough. No need for retrospective points deduction and kick them out of Premier League. Guardiola will leave and a whole host of their players would too. By the time they fully served the 2 season ban, they won't have that many players willing to play for them anymore and revenue would have been dwindled. We would probably walked with 2 more titles after this. Back at our perch the right way!
 
Dont want be be handed title by default. If they (and they wont) stripe city of the title then fine, just leave it like that. No winner.
Would it open another can of worms if we were then awarded the title because then doesnt the amount of money that a club gets from the tv pool change as per your top 4 position. Could open all sorts of legal cases for compensation

I would happily take a title or 2 by default
 
Just keep them out of Champs League for 2 seasons would be more the enough. No need for retrospective points deduction and kick them out of Premier League. Guardiola will leave and a whole host of their players would too. By the time they fully served the 2 season ban, they won't have that many players willing to play for them anymore and revenue would have been dwindled. We would probably walked with 2 more titles after this. Back at our perch the right way!

If City are stripped of the title does it mean that

a) The Club should also pay back the money they recieve for wining the title.. and that money be doled out to the club that should have (i) won, (ii) the runners up etc..?
b) what about the clubs demoted that year...?

c) Club knocked out of the FA and Carabao Cup's by City, how do you compensate them...?

All those Club's would have been denied that extra revenune and a shot at playing in Europe and whatever sponorship came with that.

It would be one shit storm to try and sort out.

That and the fact that I do not want the title handed to LFC because of what City has done, is why I believe the best way of dealing with it should be to demote City to the Championship and a nine point deduction or even to League one and no points deduction...

I would be happy with The Championship and nine points deduction and a ban from the FA Cup/Carabao cup for two years to stop them getting into Europe via the back door
 
Why ?
Where is the enjoyment in it unless you just to use it to this at utd fans. Yes by all means take it away from city but there is no satisfaction for me in being awarded a title 4 or 5 years down the road. Means nothing
Ask the people who are only just now receiving Olympic medals they justifiably won if it means nothing to them. And then ask Stevie and co if it would mean nothing to them too.
 
Good read as usual from Barney Ronay:

=============

Manchester City now look like a butterfly in danger of having its wings picked off

Champions League ban raises threat of Pep Guardiola and his squad’s high-class, well-paid talents jostling for the exit
2693.jpg


And it’s all over now, baby blue. At a stroke of Uefa’s judicial hand Manchester City have been transformed into an outlaw team. From here the future looks not just uncertain, but fraught with peril.

It is impossible to predict the endgame of Uefa’s startling decision to ban the reigning English champions from European competitions for two seasons. For City supporters the response will no doubt be one of weary defiance. Perhaps there might be some gallows consolation to be found in the fact history suggests they don’t stand to lose too much in any case.

A few desultory midweek home games. A VAR-inspired outrage, with attendant basement conspiracy theories. A quarter-final defeat to a heavyweight European power where Pep Guardiola gets the tactics wrong and sits looking sad and frail in his dugout.

At the very least the home leg against Real Madrid next month should generate a bit of atmosphere. The edicts on not booing the Uefa anthem will no doubt be strictly observed.

This feels like a much wider tipping point for European club football, for a particular model of ownership and, above all, for the management and playing personnel at the Etihad. City have been a wonderful champion team. Right now they look like a butterfly in danger of having its wings picked off.

City’s hierarchy will appeal against the ban and fine, no doubt with the same contemptuous aggression they have contested these financial charges from the start. Billionaires, let the record note, really don’t like being told what to do.

But barring some unusually rapid judicial process, it is hard to see exactly how they can hope to keep Guardiola. There has been a feeling the manager might be on his way. This is an issue that will take some time to settle. More immediate, and indeed related, is the question of how City hope to go on paying their players.

There has been something oddly reckless about this project from the start, the sense of a beautiful team running on air. Never apologise, never explain: even relative failure this season in the league has come on Guardiola’s own terms, with the refusal to go through the prosaic business of strengthening his defence, in the process also weakening his team’s midfield.

For all the good husbandry and good habits, the fine coaching, the refusal to splurge on superstars, City have still spent £340m net in transfer fees since Guardiola has been at the club, and hundreds of millions before that, all the while failing to produce a single homegrown first-team regular. Was it ever sustainable? Javier Tebas, the president of La Liga, might just have had a point all along. The numbers really don’t add up.

On one side of this equation City have the third-highest wage bill in world football at £300m. At the same time City have the fifth-largest income. Take out that self-fuelling Etihad sponsorship deal and they’re back in eighth. An inability to grow their commercial income has been the sticking point.

The grace note is the growth in broadcast income. Crucially it is here City stand to lose under the Uefa ban. Third in wages, fifth in income might look wonky but without their Uefa income the balance goes through the floor, with some estimates suggesting a loss of European football could cost between £100m-£150m per year.

This would leave an apocalyptic hole, one that makes the current squad simply unsustainable. City recently handed new deals to a rump of first-team regulars, which hardly eases the basic problem of how to keep the lights on.

Perhaps worse, a significant number of City’s most desirable assets will enter the last two years of their deals during the ban. Fernandinho, Leroy Sané and Sergio Agüero are all out of contract in June 2021. Gabriel Jesus, Riyad Mahrez, Raheem Sterling, Kevin De Bruyne and Ilkay Gündogan are free to leave in 2023.

Good luck trying to persuade a crop of high-class, mid-career elite level players to miss two years of top-table football. Plus agents come into this. Contracts will contain force majeure clauses. Nobody wants to become cold product or to lose the bonuses associated with the Champions League.

At the same time the squad is ageing. City’s best midfielder is 34, their best striker 31. This was always looking like a time to rebuild. Instead it looks like a moment of total flux.
There aren’t enough takers out there to house all of these supremely well-paid players, raising the vague threat of an unseemly jostle for the door, of expedient loans, of captive princes on draining contracts.

If the ban sticks it is hard to see past this disaster scenario. The greatest decade in Manchester City’s modern history is over. They’ll be going round this town shouting “bring out your dead”.
A little dramatic perhaps. We are some way off this. But no doubt plenty will cheer at the prospect and not only for tribal reasons. There is an argument FPP shouldn’t exist at all, the suggestion any kind of restraint or protectionism is simply pulling up the rope ladder.

Slightly absurd arguments have been made that the state-funded entity that owns City is being unfairly excluded from sport’s global elite, that it should be able to storm its way instantly to the top table simply by virtue of possessing unanswerable fossil fuel revenues. It is the kind of view you can only entertain if, at bottom, you really do like billionaires.

These arguments will be tested, by implication, at the court of arbitration for sport. City may be exonerated. For now the rules exist and City have been held to have broken them, in a notably graceless manner.

As such their success will be tainted, achievements that have out of necessity deprived others of glory, spending that has inflated the market, unsettled players, depleted opponents.

But whatever the morality here – and history will withhold its verdict for now — it is impossible not to feel a note of sadness. For all the surrounding murk and the money spent, the rules bent, the arrogance of the club hierarchy, City under Guardiola have also been the most beautiful team of the Premier League era.

Forget the stain of over-spending. We’ll always have that 100-point season. We’ll always have 15-0 across eight days against Liverpool, Feyenoord and Watford. We’ll always have that 44-pass goal against Manchester United, almost 1,000 passes against Swansea, the way the ball seems to become a living, mischievous thing, skittering about between the light blue shapes in a shared, rotational choreography.

We’ll always have that moment at the Etihad last February against Chelsea where Agüero scored a goal so stunning – an explosive moment of skill, but also a kind of coronation for his team – that the whole ground fell silent for a second, then broke into a swell of gentle applause as the replay appeared on the big screen.

This isn’t over. Billionaires don’t like to lose. City’s statement in reply to the judgment has its own notes of vengefulness, a firm hint that this process has by no means run its course. Let’s remember the best of that City team, and with kindness too. In the most practical sense, we may not see their like again.
 
The complexity of the consequences is what wil scare the FA away from doing anything. Nothing will happen to city. No “stripped titles”. Forget it.
 
Ask the people who are only just now receiving Olympic medals they justifiably won if it means nothing to them. And then ask Stevie and co if it would mean nothing to them too.

My guess is that Gerrard wouldn't want the medal like that either.

But personally I'm all for it.
 
The allegation goes that when compiling City’s accounts for 2012-13, the club’s chief financial officer Jorge Chumillas wrote an internal e-mail stating that, due to the cost of sacking Roberto Mancini, “we will have a shortfall of £9.9 million in order to comply with UEFA FFP this season”. Ferran Soriano, the chief executive, is alleged to have replied that this problem could be overcome if City could be paid the contractually stated bonus from their sponsors for winning the FA Cup.

There was just one problem with this. City had lost the FA Cup final to Wigan Athletic.

According to Der Spiegel, a compromise was reached whereby various sponsors — the Abu Dhabi airline Etihad, the Abu Dhabi-based fund Aabar Investments and the Abu Dhabi department for culture and tourism — would have their payments adjusted so that the shortfall was covered. When Chumillas asked whether they would be allowed to change the date of sponsorship payments, Simon Pearce, a board member of City Football Group and a special adviser to the club’s chairman Khaldoon al-Mubarak, is alleged to have replied, “Of course. We can do what we want.”

TL;DR Give Gerrard his medal
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom