Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[mahermi1]

The argument there would be what is the point of sponsorship and let them spend what they want?

Always amused me with Newcastle's new sponsor deal is that went from £6mill to £25mill. Their "reasoning" was that it reflected a club in the champions league.

6months later they're out the champs league and European football all together. Full season they finish 7th with no European football next season.

Justifiable as you can tell

Well then they should simply be told to drop it back down.

 

[summerisle]

Explains why masters was at the emirates and not the etihad on the final day of the season

It's because he's a condescending, snivelling cowardly bully, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Vintage]

I thought the purpose of the rules was to stop clubs going bust, not sure how curbing sponsorship deals helps with that.

I think it's the fair play part of the rules mate

 

[Neiler]

 

[Neiler]

Sorry is this for real, they won the CL, two titles, a few cups and Club World Championship in 12 months.

Come back to me for sympathy when you’re facing into your fourth relegation battle in as many seasons and have to gut your squad of all your best players every season.

 

[Sean Ashley]

The rules City are trying to bypass are not to do with sustainability, They already make profits and have the largest revenue in the division and second largest in world football.

Todays news is about reflecting fair value on sponsorship deals with associated owners.

Of Man City's 115 charges, 68 are in regards to failure to provide accurate up-to-date financial information or accurate reports for player and manager compensation.

City worrying about the 54 charges regarding their commercial dealings, have decided extreme measures is the only option to minimise or eliminate punishment by changing the rules.

As if they win. The remaining charges for failing to comply can simply be stated as a club defending itself from unlawful rules which were in place to stop City competing in the first place.

I thought the purpose of the rules was to stop clubs going bust, not sure how curbing sponsorship deals helps with that.

 

[riddick]

I think one of the weirdest things to me is that they are claiming everyone is against them when they've literally done everything they can to do illegal stuff. If their supporters celebrate when they win a league or any title then they should be ok with what happens that led up to it.

Flip it around, we KNOW we are in this position because of absolutely insane decisions that not 1 supporter has had any input in. Yeah, some of the reactions are massively overboard but City.....yeah, we're not anywhere in that league.

 

[Groucho]

I think one of the weirdest things to me is that they are claiming everyone is against them when they've literally done everything they can to do illegal stuff. If their supporters celebrate when they win a league or any title then they should be ok with what happens that led up to it.

Flip it around, we KNOW we are in this position because of absolutely insane decisions that not 1 supporter has had any input in. Yeah, some of the reactions are massively overboard but City.....yeah, we're not anywhere in that league.

Don’t get me started

 

[Ruairi77]

Sorry is this for real, they won the CL, two titles, a few cups and Club World Championship in 12 months.

Come back to me for sympathy when you’re facing into your fourth relegation battle in as many seasons and have to gut your squad of all your best players every season.

I dunno, I kinda get his point.
It's a completely different football club to the one that used to play at Maine road.
They know there's a whiff of lance Armstrong about the whole thing and none of their victories have much merit or respect.
Thats gotta sting. Sure, some great days out but a constant niggling cloud over the whole thing.

Not sure they'd swap it for Georgi Kinkladze in the championship but I'd imagine they'd prefer decent team without all the nonsense and baggage.
Also imagine if it was the geordies, just imagine how insufferable theyd be.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

If City win then they and Newcastle will likely dominate over time.

If City lose then they'll still dominate but so will 1-2 out of Chelsea, Utd, Liverpool & Arsenal every couple of seasons.

Whichever scenario clubs like us have no chance of competing so it affects us in no real manner.

Only positive outcome would be City winning and the PL clubs getting worried so introducing a proper FFP system like a salary/transfer cap across the board without taking into consideration revenues of clubs.

 

[Neiler]

The rules City are trying to bypass are not to do with sustainability, They already make profits and have the largest revenue in the division and second largest in world football.

Todays news is about reflecting fair value on sponsorship deals with associated owners.

Of Man City's 115 charges, 68 are in regards to failure to provide accurate up-to-date financial information or accurate reports for player and manager compensation.

City worrying about the 54 charges regarding their commercial dealings, have decided extreme measures is the only option to minimise or eliminate punishment by changing the rules.

As if they win. The remaining charges for failing to comply can simply be stated as a club defending itself from unlawful rules which were in place to stop City competing in the first place.

An interesting slant on City challenging the rules on commercial sponsorship dealings with arbitration, by challenging it are they defacto admitting that they broke the rules.

Whether the rules re an ass or not are irrelevent, they are but, if they broke the, they broke them, like us they signed up to them.

Also if City are say successful, could we bring a similar case for damages on the PLs application on the rules for us - say in interest charges. We lost approx 13 - 15 mill in prize money, substantial reputation al damage impacting our ability to do commercial deals and arguable getting better credit.

 

[Librarian]

The rules City are trying to bypass are not to do with sustainability, They already make profits and have the largest revenue in the division and second largest in world football.

Todays news is about reflecting fair value on sponsorship deals with associated owners.

Of Man City's 115 charges, 68 are in regards to failure to provide accurate up-to-date financial information or accurate reports for player and manager compensation.

City worrying about the 54 charges regarding their commercial dealings, have decided extreme measures is the only option to minimise or eliminate punishment by changing the rules.

As if they win. The remaining charges for failing to comply can simply be stated as a club defending itself from unlawful rules which were in place to stop City competing in the first place.

Who cares if they are bringing in extra revenue through sponsorship, it’s money into the game, surely better than running clubs through debt and paying interest which is money out of the game.

Why should owners be discouraged from growing their business with their own money in favour of owners like the Glazers and Kenwright who buy the club on debt and get the club to pay back that debt and then spend zero letting the club decline but still able to cash out at huge profit.

 

[Jeff Jones]

If City win then they and Newcastle will likely dominate over time.

If City lose then they'll still dominate but so will 1-2 out of Chelsea, Utd, Liverpool & Arsenal every couple of seasons.

Whichever scenario clubs like us have no chance of competing so it affects us in no real manner.

Only positive outcome would be City winning and the PL clubs getting worried so introducing a proper FFP system like a salary/transfer cap across the board without taking into consideration revenues of clubs.

That's something I'd like to see whether City win their case, or not.

I suppose there wouldn't be much reason for billionaires to buy clubs then.

On the topic of points deductions, yesterday, Gab Marcotti was talking about Leicester starting next season with a deduction of between 6 and 15 points.

He then said that Everton will start with a massive points deduction. He mumbles a bit but I played it back and I'm pretty sure he said 'will'.

 

[DOMNOLAN]

I don’t understand why they don’t do to city what they did to us: dock the points, and let them fight it in the meantime.

 

[Sean Ashley]

There is a few things to unpack here. So I do apologise for the longer message. It all depends on whether we want a football pyramid or an American style sporting structure.

This extra revenue which would be skewed towards the bigger clubs at the top of the pyramid, and jeopardises the the whole structure of the game.

As the want to increase revenues is why the big 6* tried to create the European super league. And if you continue to grow the revenues of the biggest earners then they leave to form a new league. The other club's below will be evaporated.

Should these extra revenues the league make in broadcasting go into grass roots or unevenly distributed to the top clubs? As the premier league clubs keep voting in favour of.

Man City will state their academy is grass roots, but all it's doing is depriving smaller entities the opportunity to grow their own talent and forcing them to close.

Then we have type of owners profits/debt is more complex, but even the super rich generally don't have the cash funds to buy these things outright most of their assets being in no-liquid form. And discouraging the mega rich from using credit and only purchase other companies on a cash basis would harm the banking systems and weaken economies.

Who cares if they are bringing in extra revenue through sponsorship, it’s money into the game, surely better than running clubs through debt and paying interest which is money out of the game.

Why should owners be discouraged from growing their business with their own money in favour of owners like the Glazers and Kenwright who buy the club on debt and get the club to pay back that debt and then spend zero letting the club decline but still able to cash out at huge profit.