Guardiola to be found out in the premier league

[catcherintherye]

I don't think they are. Chelsea had the same criticism, Blackburn had the same criticism. Manchester City are where they are now - top of the pile with no real history of success - because of the money that their owners put in since they took over. Financial Doping is a buzz phrase used to be critical of them and its exacerbated these days by Twitter and forums so the term is churned out and in wider circulation.
Arsenal, Liverpool, Man Utd are exempt from the same criticism due to the fact they have historically always won titles and been considered "big clubs"
If the owners were Russian, or French, or English - people would still take exception to the level of investment they have made.
I actually don't care that much. In fact I like Man City, a club similar to ours that have to put up with their loud mouth neighbours in Red.
Fact is "Financial Doping" term is 100% fueled by Jealousy, it is not, in any way, shape or form, racism.

99% of it seems to be directed at Citys owners though. Why not at Everton and Liverpool for benefitting from the Houlding investment? Why is that not framed as "doping"?

It seems overwhelmingly directed at owners from a certain background.

 

[catcherintherye]

Is this true though? Or is it that City and PSG's owners are the richest around? You also said 'A court have already found UAE do not own City. So the only conclusion I can draw is that the race of those involved plays a key factor in why the negative views are generated (especially as we live in a very Islamaphobic society).' - but the Deputy Prime Minister of the UAE who is a member of the royal family of Abu Dhabi owns the club. The club is owned as a form of soft power for the UAE and to help create positive feeling towards the owners and the country. That MCC also go along with this is another and incredibly grim part of public private enterprise.
You're struggling to defend City so have started suggesting it can only be race but can't actually back this up much. I'm not sure why you'\re so keen to defend City though.

But having 1 member of government who sits on each does not make the entire City board culpable for a countries crimes. There seems to be this massive double standard, compared to say John Henry being posing for matey pictures with the worlds biggest tyrant Donald Trump.

All I'd want is some consistency in how we view things. It may just be coincidence the brown owners are the ones judged to a different standard. My opinion is it's not.

As for defending City, I'm not sure I have. I'm just trying to be objective mate.

 

[catcherintherye]

Interesting reading the last few pages.

Have we firmly established if it is racist to take strong objection to non-western financial support for football clubs or not?

I would say singling out owners, and making up conspiracy theories about them is likely to be due to racism.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

I would say singling out owners, and making up conspiracy theories about them is likely to be due to racism.

Very much so. American 'Western' owners seem to get much less criticism.

Or maybe it is because it is far closer to home in terms of club ownership, eh @EverTheOptimist my big red chum?

 

[zukai12_]

What is going on in here

Nobody cares about Houlding because it was 100 years ago

 

[dead_soft]

But having 1 member of government who sits on each does not make the entire City board culpable for a countries crimes. There seems to be this massive double standard, compared to say John Henry being posing for matey pictures with the worlds biggest tyrant Donald Trump.

All I'd want is some consistency in how we view things. It may just be coincidence the brown owners are the ones judged to a different standard. My opinion is it's not.

As for defending City, I'm not sure I have. I'm just trying to be objective mate.

Posing for pictures with Trump is different to being the deputy prime minister and a member of the Royal Family. John Henry (who is an unpleasant man who has been lambasted by some as have previous Liverpool owning Americans) owning Liverpool doesn't whitewash Trump (though it could be argued it helps promote soft power of the States but that's for different reasons) in the same way that this ownership helps give moral legitimacy to a the Abu Dhabi Royal Family.

The club is owned by the Abu Dhabi royal Family, I'm not sure how you can't see that therefore does make City an arm of the country's power.

 

[catcherintherye]

Very much so. American 'Western' owners seem to get much less criticism.

Or maybe it is because it is far closer to home in terms of club ownership, eh @EverTheOptimist my big red chum?

This is really my point.

Look I'm not saying people are racist for hating City or their owners. Or are racist for disliking another team overtaking Everton. I did most of the above.

What I'm saying, is there is a coordinated campaign, with dog whistling phrases like "doping" that is being conducted by influential people in the media and from certain clubs fans, that only seems to be directed at certain types of owners. To me, that is racism at play.

Someone mentioned Blackburn earlier. Jack Walker was never called a financial doper (and subtly compared to drugs cheats). He was held up as a paragon of being a good owner for spending. That's the point. How it is framed is two tiered and its hard to avoid a conclusion of racism as a key motivator from the main proponents.

Yet we here little criticism of Trump and America, who are the world leader in torture and human rights abuses.

 

[dead_soft]

This is really my point.

Look I'm not saying people are racist for hating City or their owners. Or are racist for disliking another team overtaking Everton. I did most of the above.

What I'm saying, is there is a coordinated campaign, with dog whistling phrases like "doping" that is being conducted by influential people in the media and from certain clubs fans, that only seems to be directed at certain types of owners. To me, that is racism at play.

Someone mentioned Blackburn earlier. Jack Walker was never called a financial doper (and subtly compared to drugs cheats). He was held up as a paragon of being a good owner for spending. That's the point. How it is framed is two tiered and its hard to avoid a conclusion of racism as a key motivator from the main proponents.

Yet we here little criticism of Trump and America, who are the world leader in torture and human rights abuses.

That's just a lie.

 

[Mat70s]

Very much so. American 'Western' owners seem to get much less criticism.

Western ownership is regularly subjected to heavy opposition. The Glazers are subjected to significant criticism - both from United's fanbase and journalists due to the debt they have imposed on the club. Similarly, Hicks and Gillett received strong criticism and were eventually removed as owners of Liverpool after a court ruling. Mike Ashley is given very harsh coverage by many in the media and across football. Blackpool are still suffering from the toxic ruins of Owen Oyston’s ownership.

The legal-based accusations against City's ownership are due to financial irregularities - specifically alleged breaches of financial fair play. This follows a two year operation after leaks to the German publication Der Spiegel. Assigning a race-related motive to such complex and protracted legal wrangling is possibly unhelpful and problematic. If City are innocent of these breaches then a court will find in their favour.

 

[catcherintherye]

Posing for pictures with Trump is different to being the deputy prime minister and a member of the Royal Family. John Henry (who is an unpleasant man who has been lambasted by some as have previous Liverpool owning Americans) owning Liverpool doesn't whitewash Trump (though it could be argued it helps promote soft power of the States but that's for different reasons) in the same way that this ownership helps give moral legitimacy to a the Abu Dhabi Royal Family.

The club is owned by the Abu Dhabi royal Family, I'm not sure how you can't see that therefore does make City an arm of the country's power.

Look let's take each bit of this.

The tacit support John Henry gave Trump posing for photos with Trump and giving him a personalised Red Sox shirt massively enhances and normalises Trumps reputation. A man who has been stealing children from their parents and putting them into camps. Uniteds owners go further than this. But nobody ever holds them accountable to the same degree.

As for City, Sheikh Mansour owns City, not the country. He is an individual. This has been established in court.

I'm not sure why it's only Mansour who has to answer for the behaviour of his countrys government. The way people go on, he has personally murdered people. Its complete nonsense.

 

[catcherintherye]

That's just a lie.

What football journalists have written about it then? Has anyone ever asked FSG about this? Or the Glaziers?

 

[catcherintherye]

Western ownership is regularly subjected to heavy opposition. The Glazers are subjected to significant criticism - both from United's fanbase and journalists due to the debt they have imposed on the club. Similarly, Hicks and Gillett received strong criticism and were eventually removed as owners of Liverpool after a court ruling. Mike Ashley is given very harsh coverage by many in the media and across football. Blackpool are still suffering from the toxic ruins of Owen Oyston’s ownership.

The legal-based accusations against City's ownership are due to financial irregularities - specifically alleged breaches of financial fair play. This follows a two year operation after leaks to the German publication Der Spiegel. Assigning a race-related motive to such complex and protracted legal wrangling is possibly unhelpful and problematic. If City are innocent of these breaches then a court will find in their favour.

A court has already found in their favour.

The guy from Der Speigel is serving a sentence for fraud (I believe) in an unrelated matter. I cant really take the credibility of his testimony seriously.

 

[Mat70s]

A court has already found in their favour.

The guy from Der Speigel is serving a sentence for fraud (I believe) in an unrelated matter. I cant really take the credibility of his testimony seriously.

Last summer the court of arbitration for sport did overturn City's CL ban from UEFA. The decision was that “most of the alleged breaches were either not established or time-barred” which was an interesting verdict.

City remain under investigation from the Premier League due to FFP. This was something City tried to prevent happening but lost a court ruling in July this year.

 

[dead_soft]

Look let's take each bit of this.

The tacit support John Henry gave Trump posing for photos with Trump and giving him a personalised Red Sox shirt massively enhances and normalises Trumps reputation. A man who has been stealing children from their parents and putting them into camps. Uniteds owners go further than this. But nobody ever holds them accountable to the same degree.

As for City, Sheikh Mansour owns City, not the country. He is an individual. This has been established in court.

I'm not sure why it's only Mansour who has to answer for the behaviour of his countrys government. The way people go on, he has personally murdered people. Its complete nonsense.

The Abu Dhabi Royal Family own Man City. Donald Trump does not own any football clubs - in fact his main involvement with football has been the number of times he called out the US Team and had multiple articles ridiculing him.

But the Echo have mentioned it - I'm not exactly sure what you are asking for?

Liverpool director backed Trump while FSG donated 'more than $5.2m to US race'

Members of the FSG hierarchy - who own Liverpool - have been no stranger to making pledges in the race for the White House

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[twoblue]

99% of it seems to be directed at Citys owners though. Why not at Everton and Liverpool for benefitting from the Houlding investment? Why is that not framed as "doping"?

It seems overwhelmingly directed at owners from a certain background.

Why not at Everton and Liverpool for benefitting from the Houlding investment? Why is that not framed as "doping"?
No one had come up with the phrase 100+ years ago

“It seems overwhelmingly directed at owners from a certain background.” “99% of it seems to be directed at Citys owners though”

it seems 100% aimed at owners who invest in clubs and who haven’t traditional been amongst the elite, then buy up the top talent from across the globe. Don’t make this a bigger issue than it is.

The colour of the skin is not reason for the critiisism.

we have a problem in this country with people claiming it’s “political correctness gone made”. calling out racism where it doesn’t exist gives these people fuel.
reign it in and keep fighting the good fight where it matter ?