Man city escape ban! Or did they? [Update 6/2/23]

IronSpider said:
I think you are deluded if you think he didn't put a penny in and you got no benefit from him being a large shareholder.


:D
Click to expand...
I think you're the deluded one here and have made a wild, inaccurate assumption just because he was a shareholder. Usmanov was in a battle with Kroenke to own Arsenal - they were both buying up other large shareholders stock but ultimately Usmanov lost when the majority of the Arsenal board chose to sell to Kroenke. Usmanov made a lot of ex Arsenal shareholders rich however he never put a penny into the club. Heck, he was even blocked from joining the Arsenal board despite the fact that he was the 2nd largest shareholder.
 
From that press conference today it doesnt sound like Pep intends to walk if City are found guilty, a 180 on his previous statement from last time but then again where would he go anyway. The football landscape has changed a fair bit in recent years and the giants of European football are not so giant anymore.
 
Tombstone said:
From that press conference today it doesnt sound like Pep intends to walk if City are found guilty, a 180 on his previous statement from last time but then again where would he go anyway. The football landscape has changed a fair bit in recent years and the giants of European football are not so giant anymore.
Click to expand...

But they are definitely not guilty and the UEFA judgement that was largely nullified by the CAS is definitely proof that they didn't do anything against the rules.

He will walk when he wants to. If he was going to walk because they had broken the rules he would have done it already. Seems clear as day that they broke a lot of rules. Whether you agree with those rules or not is another matter but they broke them.
 
BaZ87 said:
It'll take years before this case is finished, he'll have left City before then regardless of their guilt or not.
Click to expand...

I would have thought so. A few lawyers in this area have been discussing it and suggested it could take 5-10 years potentially. By that point the ESL will be in place and City won't even care I imagine.
 
fez said:
I would have thought so. A few lawyers in this area have been discussing it and suggested it could take 5-10 years potentially. By that point the ESL will be in place and City won't even care I imagine.
Click to expand...
Another 5-10 years of City winning the league under the cloud of all this would be an awful situation
 
BaZ87 said:
It'll take years before this case is finished, he'll have left City before then regardless of their guilt or not.
Click to expand...
True, by the time this case is resolved Pep will be long gone anyway, I just found it interesting that last time round he had said he would go if there were wrong doings but not this time round, possibly this time he didnt because as you point out, he already knows he will be gone by then anyway.
 
Surely, sanctions can be put in place in the shorter term and it's those sanctions they can then appeal against which will take years in court?

Otherwise, I don't see the point in FFP even existing (sure I've said as such beforehand). Letting the rest of the league know you can commit hundreds of breaches and it could be 20 years from then before you see any repercussions, lol.
 
Ayahuasca said:
Surely, sanctions can be put in place in the shorter term and it's those sanctions they can then appeal against which will take years in court?

Otherwise, I don't see the point in FFP even existing (sure I've said as such beforehand). Letting the rest of the league know you can commit hundreds of breaches and it could be 20 years from then before you see any repercussions, lol.
Click to expand...
They've not been found guilty of anything yet, just charged. A couple of legal eagles seemed to think we could be looking at 2+ years for these charges to be heard in full. One of them worked on Derby's(?) case in the Championship which was far more straight forward with far fewer charges (just 2 iinm) and it took in excess of a year.

You cannot impose punishments until City are found guilty and that could take a few years.
 
BaZ87 said:
They've not been found guilty of anything yet, just charged. A couple of legal eagles seemed to think we could be looking at 2+ years for these charges to be heard in full. One of them worked on Derby's(?) case in the Championship which was far more straight forward with far fewer charges (just 2 iinm) and it took in excess of a year.

You cannot impose punishments until City are found guilty and that could take a few years.
Click to expand...
It’s going to seriously taint any future success though
 
BaZ87 said:
Will it? None of this is new. Everybody knew City's sponsorships were bs 10 years ago and all the documents confirming it were leaked 5ish years ago. Has it tainted any of City's recent success?
Click to expand...

This is the reality of it. You have to be wilfully blind to think that City didn't get out of their European ban on a technicality and have been cheating for years. People have been making throwaway remarks about it for years but its always been a case of "theres no point getting too much into it because nothing will be done".
 
robfosters said:
Its hard to imagine how City have the largest club revenue in the world
Click to expand...
Ahh you see thats where you are wrong. That the only way you can rationalise City having the biggest club revenue in the world. Using your imagination.
 
inogen said:
Anyone decrying past unfair spending needs to go back to the beginning of the Premier League, the massive influx of TV money and the collusion in that and what effects it had with Man Utd and BSkyB. Everyone complained about it at the time, except Man U fans who came out with the same apologist nonsense that Chelsea, Man City and Newcastle amongst others have done since.

If Man Utd get bought by Qatar we'll see the same thing again, it's started already with the "oh, we won't be bad as ____" and the "we're the biggest, bestest club in the land so we deserve to win everything, all the time, forever, so how we do that isn't really as relevant to us as it to other clubs".
Click to expand...
This is absolute nonsense. The Premier league launched in 1992. Sky bought Utd shares in 1998, at the same time NTL spent millions on various clubs, Granada bought a stake in Arsenal and a 10% share in Liverpool(maybe if OnDigital had been a success you would be singing a different tune?), Sky also had shares in Chelsea, Leeds, Sunderland and ManCity.
There was no unfair advantage for UTD winning the 92/93 season and for the following seasons, they had a terrible start and Norwich led the table for much of the season when they were one of the favourites to go down, Alan Shearer went for a record fee to Blackburn, Utd bought Cantona for 1.2m(there was a rumour that it was even less) which was a big turning point and cost much less than some of the other clubs had spent on players. Utd built on that success for the subsequent seasons.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom