• 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.
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.

I’d like to believe this is a world ending scenario for them but just don’t see it plus some of his arguments don’t stack up.

They, like Chelsea before them, spent their way to the top and can now make money like the rest of us do. They’re a big club now.

As for producing kids, City have always had a good academy and are still producing/ buying good youngsters. It’s just that, again like Chelsea, they’re choosing to buy instead.
 
I’d like to believe this is a world ending scenario for them but just don’t see it plus some of his arguments don’t stack up.

They, like Chelsea before them, spent their way to the top and can now make money like the rest of us do. They’re a big club now.

As for producing kids, City have always had a good academy and are still producing/ buying good youngsters. It’s just that, again like Chelsea, they’re choosing to buy instead.

But Chelsea aren't able to dominate anything like they used to.

If this thing sticks City will have to live within their means which long term makes them another contender like Spurs or Arsenal but really struggling to match us and Utd.

They don't have to go back to being a mid table club for this to be a massive shift in our favour.
 
Best case, it leads to pep leaving and or a host of key players, can't really see the champions league ban staying in tact, 1 year ban best case.

Apparently the Premier League investigation into the same case is on-going but they cant pile on, so expect little/nothing to come of that.
 
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
And does the league title go automatically to the team who came second, or do you remove all results that city were involved in & recalculate the table?

We took 3 points from CIty in the 13/14 season; Chelsea were only 2 points behind us. If City did the double over Chelsea that season (I have no idea and cant be arsed looking it up) it could mean Chelsea become retrospective champions
 
Suarez would go full kit over it though

That potential title was all about him though.
 
And does the league title go automatically to the team who came second, or do you remove all results that city were involved in & recalculate the table?

We took 3 points from CIty in the 13/14 season; Chelsea were only 2 points behind us. If City did the double over Chelsea that season (I have no idea and cant be arsed looking it up) it could mean Chelsea become retrospective champions

As I said, It's a shit storm
 
And does the league title go automatically to the team who came second, or do you remove all results that city were involved in & recalculate the table?

We took 3 points from CIty in the 13/14 season; Chelsea were only 2 points behind us. If City did the double over Chelsea that season (I have no idea and cant be arsed looking it up) it could mean Chelsea become retrospective champions
Good question. I checked. Chelsea took 6 points off City. Beat them home and away.

We took 3pts off them. So we'd still win the league if you anulled City's results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C/O
Good question. I checked. Chelsea took 6 points off City. Beat them home and away.

We took 3pts off them. So we'd still win the league if you anulled City's results.
I reckon it will just be points deduction although there's also the remote possibility of relegation.
 
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.
I don't think the FA/PL can do 'nothing' if their rules have clearly been broken. It will clearly be acceptable for that to happen. They will however wait (under the guise of 'investigation') until UEFA have broken ground first though.
 
I think in a roundabout way, Chelsea helped remove the fear factor about big spending clubs, because football still continues to be cyclic and no one dominates indefinitely. We've seen that anything can happen; poor spending, bad senior appointments, bad decisions.

When Chelsea first started buying their way to success, I couldn't see anything beyond another Madrid/Barca scenario where money and arrogance meant they would buy who they wanted and would rule for years, but they did drop form, they did buy bad players and other teams did still win the league. It's still mostly the big spenders who win silverware, but it became clear that winning was still as much down to good management as having the resources. Chelsea have had money and won, and they've had money and crashed and burned. We've had reasonable money, enough to win leagues, and failed drastically. It's only with the catalyst of adding Klopp that everything has slotted into place, for us.

So with regards to City, inevitably they have hit a curve and gone the wrong way. This is obviously a big help to any team with aspirations of dominating for a couple of years, but what goes around comes around, eventually United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs or someone else will become the next team to be afraid of. We just have to keep doing what we're doing and we have to think long and hard in advance of the days when someone takes over from Klopp, because it will take a Shankly/Paisley level of changeover to sustain what we have. But obviously City's current predicament is a huge encouragement that we can keep going at this pace and set the standard for other teams to aspire to, without being grossly reliant on spending massively.
 
Last edited:
I think in a roundabout way, Chelsea helped remove the fear factor about big spending clubs, because football still continues to be cyclic and no one dominates indefinitely. We've seen that anything can happen; poor spending, bad senior appointments, bad decisions.

When Chelsea first started buying their way to success, I couldn't see anything beyond another Madrid/Barca scenario where money and arrogance meant they would buy who they wanted and would rule for years, but they did drop form, they did buy bad players and other teams did still win the league. It's still mostly the big spenders who win silverware, but it became clear that winning was still as much down to good management as having the resources. Chelsea have had money and won, and they've had money and crashed and burnt. We've had reasonable money, enough to win leagues, and failed drastically. It's only with the catalyst of adding Klopp that everything has slotted into place, for us.

So with regards to City, inevitably they have hit a curve and gone the wrong way. This is obviously a big help to any team with aspirations of dominating for a couple of years, but what goes around comes around, eventually United, City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs or someone else will become the next team to be afraid of. We just have to keep doing what we're doing and we have to think long and hard in advance of the days when someone takes over from Klopp, because it will take a Shankly/Paisley level of changeover to sustain what we have. But obviously City's current predicament is a huge encouragement that we can keep going at this pace and set the standard for other teams to aspire to, without being grossly reliant on spending massively.

Good post.
Absolutely right that our club needs to 100% focus on continuous improvement. We are all enjoying City take their lumps and, why not? Other fans bases enjoyed our dismal decade too. But in the long run, our success and failure will be determined by what our club does.
 
And does the league title go automatically to the team who came second, or do you remove all results that city were involved in & recalculate the table?

We took 3 points from CIty in the 13/14 season; Chelsea were only 2 points behind us. If City did the double over Chelsea that season (I have no idea and cant be arsed looking it up) it could mean Chelsea become retrospective champions
Chelsea actually did the double over City in 2013-14.
 
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Fuck off Citeh, you cheating, tin-foil, plastic cunts
Ok I'll give it a whirl.

Roses are red
But Citeh ain't pure
Take that up your blowhole
Sheikh Mansour

Ok a bit shit - I know. How about an Irish vibe

There once was a forum called fume
Whose thickness made even our Dreamy swoon
Their posters were weird pricks
Filled with conspiracy whoppers and dicks
Left wondering how the fuck did the Reds smash it with six

Ok another go... Bear with me. I'm just warming up!

There once was a sage red called Roja
Who thought blue hoops tasted like ambrosia
He supped on blue fume
Watched with glee their misery and doom
Then rimmed on Klopp when it was all over

Ok last one....

There once was a conspiracy called VAR
Which melted blue minds from afar
The forum blue fume
Is quite bitter I presume
Anyone would think we just jizzed on their ma

You know what's funny. I actually get paid for doing this... Sometimes..... Mostly with the promise of a reach around (Even then I'm sometimes left hanging 🙁 )
 
I'm probably expecting from this if I was gonna take a punt.

CAS overturn it to a one season ban but leave the fine alone.
Premier league give them a mickey mouse fine like say 15mill, and tell them not to be naughty again
Pep stays next year even though they're banned, to be the martyr, then fucks off at the end of the season


Best outcome would be:

CAS say tough titties and let the punishment stand
Premier league hit them with a fine, transfer ban, and points deduction
Pep fucks off at the end of this season
Aguero, De Bruyne, Sane and Fernandinho leave
 
I'm probably expecting from this if I was gonna take a punt.

CAS overturn it to a one season ban but leave the fine alone.
Premier league give them a mickey mouse fine like say 15mill, and tell them not to be naughty again
Pep stays next year even though they're banned, to be the martyr, then fucks off at the end of the season


Best outcome would be:

CAS say tough titties and let the punishment stand
Premier league hit them with a fine, transfer ban, and points deduction
Pep fucks off at the end of this season
Aguero, De Bruyne, Sane and Fernandinho leave
They're two of the worst attempts at limerick's I've ever read.
 
You just put me in mind of this -

There was a young man from Japan,
Whose limericks he couldn't make scan,
When asked why it was,
He said "It's because,
I always try to fit as many words on to the last line as I absolutely possibly can"
There was an old whopper called Tom
Who forgot the football he won
He should have thought more
Before I rimmed him hardcore
Now bend over and let’s have more fun..

On an Isle that was lovely and green
Lived Tom who was always a queen
He loved Rojas bum
He’d rim it for fun
‘Till his balls then fell off from gangrene

ok I’ll stop
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom