Manchester City Verdict Strains UK-UAE Diplomatic Relations

[313Ghazi]

Goodbye Manchester Shitty. Always knew they were cheats.

 

[maxpane]

They will get away from this .

 

[PakFactor]

Morons could have incentivized companies to build out in the UAE and offer $30 billion in funding, rather than offshoring funds to the UK. This is why there will be no development within the region.

 

[Watandar]

Can someone give me the jist of what bad things Man City and Emiratis did here ? From some articles I read it just seemed like they were doing some financial manipulation, like putting misleading figures into accounts, off the books accounts and hidden secret jobs to reward certain people.

 

[Master Chief]

Can someone give me the jist of what bad things Man City and Emiratis did here ? From some articles I read it just seemed like they were doing some financial manipulation, like putting misleading figures into accounts, off the books accounts and hidden secret jobs to reward certain people.

In Premier League football, there is a group of financial restrictions loosely termed as "FINANCIAL FAIR PLAY (FFP)", which limits clubs' spending to an amount dependent upon that which they have rightfully and transparently earned.

The reason this concept exists is to stop clubs going bankrupt through spending (spending on players by transfers mostly). The reasoning is sound and protects the interests of everyone who works for or is otherwise invested in that club - a team that overspends can risk bankruptcy, which renders it potentially having to fold forever - this has happened a few times in modern football history (usually in lower leagues).

Now, aside from protecting solvency and viability as a business, if a team fudges its numbers to permit it to spend MORE than its rivals, it suddenly gains an unfair advantage.

Hypothetical E.g. Norwich City made a certain amount of money in a financial year from all sources (sales of players, gate receipts, real sponsorships etc) and can spend a certain derivative of that number on whatever it wants the next season (including new players). If Man City falsely inflates its income that same year and indeed over many years, it is permitted to spend more on new players (or anything else). Having extra spending power allowed Man City to buy marquee signings year after year and dominate the transfer market, which brings success on the pitch.

For this reason, Norwich City and every other team will claim Man City fielded a team that they had no right to field for a decade.

Now you may ask why can't the owner simply be allowed to inject their own money, a fair question, but again - I THINK there is a cap and has always been one for directly injectable funds from board members. In other words, the company "Man City plc" must "generate" its funds as any other club does through commercial venture. This cap on direct funding - theoretically - creates equitable commercial competitiveness between teams.

(The unique issue in sports is that a degree of levelling of the playing field, excuse the pun, is necessary, while in regular non-sports commerce, a sugar daddy can do what he pleases with his investment bundle. You can't just "buy" success in sports, with the exception of being a genuinely successful enough buiness model to reinvest all that extra wealth, as that exception is regarded as fair graft/"competitiveness" by a club and is worthy of reward...i suppose!)

 

[Watandar]

In Premier League football, there is a group of financial restrictions loosely termed as "FINANCIAL FAIR PLAY (FFP)", which limits clubs' spending to an amount dependent upon that which they have rightfully and transparently earned.

The reason this concept exists is to stop clubs going bankrupt through spending (spending on players by transfers mostly). The reasoning is sound and protects the interests of everyone who works for or is otherwise invested in that club - a team that overspends can risk bankruptcy, which renders it potentially having to fold forever - this has happened a few times in modern football history (usually in lower leagues).

Now, aside from protecting solvency and viability as a business, if a team fudges its numbers to permit it to spend MORE than its rivals, it suddenly gains an unfair advantage.

Hypothetical E.g. Norwich City made a certain amount of money in a financial year from all sources (sales of players, gate receipts, real sponsorships etc) and can spend a certain derivative of that number on whatever it wants the next season (including new players). If Man City falsely inflates its income that same year and indeed over many years, it is permitted to spend more on new players (or anything else). Having extra spending power allowed Man City to buy marquee signings year after year and dominate the transfer market, which brings success on the pitch.

For this reason, Norwich City and every other team will claim Man City fielded a team that they had no right to field for a decade.

Now you may ask why can't the owner simply be allowed to inject their own money, a fair question, but again - I THINK there is a cap and has always been one for directly injectable funds from board members. In other words, the company "Man City plc" must "generate" its funds as any other club does through commercial venture. This cap on direct funding - theoretically - creates equitable commercial competitiveness between teams.

(The unique issue in sports is that a degree of levelling of the playing field, excuse the pun, is necessary, while in regular non-sports commerce, a sugar daddy can do what he pleases with his investment bundle. You can't just "buy" success in sports, with the exception of being a genuinely successful enough buiness model to reinvest all that extra wealth, as that exception is regarded as fair graft/"competitiveness" by a club and is worthy of reward...i suppose!)

Thanks for your detailed explanation. Much appreciated.

 

[K2RULEZ]

Morons could have incentivized companies to build out in the UAE and offer $30 billion in funding, rather than offshoring funds to the UK. This is why there will be no development within the region.

PR and sportswashing... All gone down the drain. The Iran war has been a disaster for UAE brand. Now this.

Be rest assured that these Emiratis are going to hide behind daddy Israel for a comeback. The problem is, daddy Israel has genocide problem of its own.

 

[Musings]

They cheated. Every team technically has a claim against them. They ought to get hard core punishments - watch them wriggle out of it

 

[K2RULEZ]

They will get away from this .

If they do, they will become even greater villains. Hated all across UK football stadiums. City will be called the City Epstein off football.

 

[Watandar]

If they do, they will become even greater villains. Hated all across the UK football stadiums. City will be called the City Epstein.

They will likely get a slap on the wrist. A third party will be brought in to clean up their accounting and auditing. Money talks.

 

[K2RULEZ]

They will likely get a slap on the wrist. A third party will be brought in to clean up their accounting and auditing. Money talks.

You cannot imagine the hate City will receive. They are already called cheats.

 

[K2RULEZ]