Manchester City’s victories are absolutely meaningless IMO

Nano said:
The only rules they are breaking are the ones put in place by the rich super clubs to keep the rich super clubs at the top. They aren't outspending Chelsea, Utd etc and the other European super clubs. Financial fair play doesn't exist. It's not there for fairness. It's there to stop teams like Newcastle joining the party.

At our level FFP is there to prevent clubs going bust but it's different at the top level. All the teams at the top are huge spenders so I'm not sure who you want to win. They are all as bad as each other.
Click to expand...
I've said this before, all FFP does is stop teams catching up with the "big boys" and keeps the status quo, its hidden behind the line of its to protect clubs from going bust
 
Anybody4aBeer said:
I've said this before, all FFP does is stop teams catching up with the "big boys" and keeps the status quo, its hidden behind the line of its to protect clubs from going bust
Click to expand...
Kind of not working though is it? Spurs, Liverpool, Everton and Chelsea are all in quite deep $hit at the moment. Newcastle and Man City (neither part of the 'big 5' who formed the PL) are undoubtedly doing ok.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Absolutely spot on. We'll see the Geordies being investigated soon enough.
Click to expand...
Good. As I said earlier, lots of clubs have been investigated. I posted the list of those who’ve been charged and fined by UEFA. Only City and PSG have Arab owners. And if there is evidence any club doing what City appear to have been doing over a 10-12 year period then they should be charged and punished.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
Good. As I said earlier, lots of clubs have been investigated. I posted the list of those who’ve been charged and fined by UEFA. Only City and PSG have Arab owners. And if there is evidence any club doing what City appear to have been doing over a 10-12 year period then they should be charged and punished.
Click to expand...
Completely agree with you, but what do you you reckon the punishment will be - fine and possible couple of transfer window embargos?

Whatever it will be (more than likely after appeal) it will be puny and unbefitting. And I think the likes of City know this, hence why they really don't give too much of a sh*t.......their lawyers are better than FIFA/UEFAs........
 
I wonder if our results are considered meaningless by Shrewsbury, MK Dons, Port Vale and their like because we spend more money and are lucky that our owner covers debts and uses the losses to legitimately offset to some degree against profits from his other group businesses. All within the rules, all legit, but I wonder if those other clubs agree we operate on a level playing field with even others like Rotherham. I assume Bulkhaul, for example, does not operate and make profit within any of the regimes owned by Man City, Newcastle etc and other similar regimes and that money never ever filters its way into the profit and loss accounts that assist in Boro’s wider picture. 🤔

As for rule breaking and cheating, we have done so a few decades back and we lost our PL status for doing so., it just was not a financial rule thats all. I recall Robbie Mustoe saying the players were all against it too. Horrendous decision and cost the club financially.
Anyway, nice to know we are squeaky clean in every way and don’t need to ignore any element of where the clubs money may have filtered down from…. Phew!
 
coluka said:
I wonder if our results are considered meaningless by Shrewsbury, MK Dons, Port Vale and their like because we spend more money and are lucky that our owner covers debts and uses the losses to legitimately offset to some degree against profits from his other group businesses. All within the rules, all legit, but I wonder if those other clubs agree we operate on a level playing field with even others like Rotherham. I assume Bulkhaul, for example, does not operate and make profit within any of the regimes owned by Man City, Newcastle etc and other similar regimes and that money never ever filters its way into the profit and loss accounts that assist in Boro’s wider picture. 🤔

As for rule breaking and cheating, we have done so a few decades back and we lost our PL status for doing so., it just was not a financial rule thats all. I recall Robbie Mustoe saying the players were all against it too. Horrendous decision and cost the club financially.
Anyway, nice to know we are squeaky clean in every way and don’t need to ignore any element of where the clubs money may have filtered down from…. Phew!
Click to expand...
We broke the rules in 1997 and we paid the price. We broke the rules in the 1980s and paid the price, almost going out of business.

If you can find evidence that those running Boro now have been doing what City have been doing over the past decade or more, then you need to contact the FA and relevant authorities with it. The falsifying of accounts, the non-cooperation, the numerous shell companies, the uncontested charges for financial irregularities and subsequent payments, the undeclared payments.

If the Boro have been doing what City, PSG et al have been doing then we should be punished for it. I look forward to reading through the charges and evidence that shows we’ve been cheating.
 
h_m_boro said:
Completely agree with you, but what do you you reckon the punishment will be - fine and possible couple of transfer window embargos?

Whatever it will be (more than likely after appeal) it will be puny and unbefitting. And I think the likes of City know this, hence why they really don't give too much of a sh*t.......their lawyers are better than FIFA/UEFAs........
Click to expand...
I’ve no idea what will happen to them. They should be kicked out of the league but they’re presumably too rich and powerful for that to happen. It’ll probably be a slap on the wrist and we try and brush it under the carpet and move things along.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
We broke the rules in 1997 and we paid the price. We broke the rules in the 1980s and paid the price, almost going out of business.

If you can find evidence that those running Boro now have been doing what City have been doing over the past decade or more, then you need to contact the FA and relevant authorities with it. The falsifying of accounts, the non-cooperation, the numerous shell companies, the uncontested charges for financial irregularities and subsequent payments, the undeclared payments.

If the Boro have been doing what City, PSG et al have been doing then we should be punished for it. I look forward to reading through the charges and evidence that shows we’ve been cheating.
Click to expand...
100%. I've no idea why any Boro fan (well aware of how rules are *sometimes* enforced) would want to defend City if they're guilty of wrongdoing. Making out like what we did for a year or so in the mid-90s, because we paid Ravanelli a big wage, is somehow 'as bad' is absolutely laughable. They've spent over £1.5bn on transfer fees alone, possibly illegally according to the PL itself!
 
Last edited:
viv_andersons_nana said:
We broke the rules in 1997 and we paid the price. We broke the rules in the 1980s and paid the price, almost going out of business.

If you can find evidence that those running Boro now have been doing what City have been doing over the past decade or more, then you need to contact the FA and relevant authorities with it. The falsifying of accounts, the non-cooperation, the numerous shell companies, the uncontested charges for financial irregularities and subsequent payments, the undeclared payments.

If the Boro have been doing what City, PSG et al have been doing then we should be punished for it. I look forward to reading through the charges and evidence that shows we’ve been cheating.
Click to expand...
Clearly you had read what i said and taken somewhat of a leap, not like you Viv.

Does Bulkhaul trade and take profit from any countries regimes whose football clubs you seem so angry with? If they do, then what does that say, even if it is within the rules, are we allowing awful regimes to fund Boro through the side door?

I am all for anyone breaking rules being held to account btw, just like Boro have in the past. The fact that Boro’s rule breaking they were guilty of is in the past is ok though as its not now, is it? I supported the Boro then during the rule breaking times and always will, so I guess I am still a bad lad for doing so and will do moving forwards whatever the situation, I may not like it, but I can’t do owt about it other than an option i would never take. I assume you were as upset with Boro back then, albeit different rules, but as they say, rules are rules.
 
coluka said:
Clearly you had read what i said and taken somewhat of a leap, not like you Viv.

Does Bulkhaul trade and take profit from any countries regimes whose football clubs you seem so angry with? If they do, then what does that say, even if it is within the rules, are we allowing awful regimes to fund Boro through the side door?

I am all for anyone breaking rules being held to account btw, just like Boro have in the past. The fact that Boro’s rule breaking they were guilty of is in the past is ok though as its not now, is it? I supported the Boro then during the rule breaking times and always will, so I guess I am still a bad lad for doing so and will do moving forwards whatever the situation, I may not like it, but I can’t do owt about it other than an option i would never take. I assume you were as upset with Boro back then, albeit different rules, but as they say, rules are rules.
Click to expand...
I don’t really see the relevance of who Bulkhaul may or may not be trading with? We’re discussing Manchester City’s breaches of financial regulations.

I don’t think I ever said Boro’s rule-breaking in the past is or ever was okay. In fact I’ve said throughout this thread that if there is evidence of our club doing what City - and those other clubs investigated, charged and fined by the authorities - appear to have done then they should be dealt with in the same way.

I was only 3 in 1986 but one of my earliest memories is reading in the broadsheet Gazette about how the club had been made to pay what they owed in full. I refused to go to bed that night and several nights after, much to Mam and Dad’s chagrin.

In the 90s, I was fuming about the three points fiasco. I thought we’d been wronged. I protested about it at the FA Cup final. Now, I’m not so sure about it. There’s a sense we were wronged but I think everyone on this thread would say we should’ve gone to Blackburn and played. By not doing so we’d left ourselves wide open. The FA decided we’d committed an offence and punished us. You can argue about the scale of the punishment of course.

I’m not entirely sure what any of this has to do with a club systematically falsifying accounts, failing to cooperate and failing to declare expenditure though.
 
What financial rules have Boro broken? The Inland Revenue tried to wind us up for unpaid monies (which they wanted 100p/£ where other clubs were coming up with payment plant a fraction of that) and in 97 it was down to not fielding a team. Has Gibson been dishonest in his accounting? Genuine question.
 
h_m_boro said:
What financial rules have Boro broken? The Inland Revenue tried to wind us up for unpaid monies (which they wanted 100p/£ where other clubs were coming up with payment plant a fraction of that) and in 97 it was down to not fielding a team. Has Gibson been dishonest in his accounting? Genuine question.
Click to expand...
It really feels like some people just want to defend poor little big-spending Abu Dhabi owned multiple-league winning possible cheats Man City because they play nice football or Haaland is good to watch or whatever.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
What financial rules existed then?
Click to expand...
So you’re suggesting had there been financial rules at that time that Mr.Gibson would have broken them?

I don’t think you are suggesting that, but if not, I fail to see your point and again think as with Norman, it’s a comparison that doesn’t give enough consideration to the context of each respective time.

The rules have been brought in and Man City have broken them, not only have they broken them, they’re backed by blood money and are using our game to clean it and their reputation.

Please, other than we spent big during a short period in our history (as did other clubs to a larger scale btw), how is it comparable?

Because if that’s literally the only comparison you’re making then it isn’t worth a great deal when broader context is considered.
 
atypical_boro said:
It really feels like some people just want to defend poor little big-spending Abu Dhabi owned multiple-league winning possible cheats Man City because they play nice football or Haaland is good to watch or whatever.
Click to expand...
religion, no, football, is the opiate of the masses?
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Absolute nonsense, that's when we had more attention and praise than at any other time. BBC Saturday lunchtime TV was interrupted by Des Lynam to say he'd signed for us.

We had coverage like we've never seen before and it escalated when Emerson and Ravanelli came through the doors.

So why did they come here?
Click to expand...
For money, I think that’s been established.
 
h_m_boro said:
What financial rules have Boro broken? The Inland Revenue tried to wind us up for unpaid monies (which they wanted 100p/£ where other clubs were coming up with payment plant a fraction of that) and in 97 it was down to not fielding a team. Has Gibson been dishonest in his accounting? Genuine question.
Click to expand...

Exactly there were no rules to break viv that was the point they moved the goal posts at the last minute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top