Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

City Football Group

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • That Night In Barcelona
    replied
    Also Pessotto, Birindelli, Zebina and Legrottaglie

    Leave a comment:


  • Gangster Octopus
    replied
    Originally posted by hobbes View Post
    Can't we ask an Octopus or the Mirror's supercomputer or sommat?
    Yup, it all went to ratshit when Manchester United and Liverpool etc voted to keep all home receipts for themselves. Greed has been totally in charge since then.

    Leave a comment:


  • E10 Rifle
    replied
    The formation of the Premier League wasn't football's original sin but in the modern age it was a decisive one. And all those who voted for it - be they Oldham or Man Utd - can't credibly complain about the consequences biting them on the arse.

    I always remember in the early exchanges of the breakaway plans in the mid-to-late 80s, Martin Edwards saying "the small clubs have been bleeding the game dry - they need to be put to sleep." That's the chairman of Manchester United wanting half our clubs to die. People like Edwards knew how a breakaway would benefit clubs like his and schemed actively for it from 1985 on. They weren't a lucky mid-table club who just happened to have a decent youth team. They were the richest and best supported club in the country and they wanted to fuck the rest of us over.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Speaking of which

    [https://twitter.com/MikeKeegan_DM/status/1623079543379468291?t=SsuniZnOHGlq116VDZXCPA&s=19

    Leave a comment:


  • Sean of the Shed
    replied
    Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
    it kind of is though. Hardly the first sin in English football history but the point at which the die was cast for where we are now.
    The formation of the Premier League seemed like a massive turning point at which top level football became a money making business at the expense of community hub and game of the people, but looking back from this point it no longer does.
    Every subsequent decision made by the Premier League and its leading clubs has been a "hold my beer" moment as they think of yet more underhand and malevolent ways to make more money without any consideration of who gets pushed down into the dirt.

    Leave a comment:


  • ad hoc
    replied
    Originally posted by Flynnie View Post
    I’m just tired of the Premier League being some kind of original sin
    it kind of is though. Hardly the first sin in English football history but the point at which the die was cast for where we are now
    that excuses all other subsequent actions.
    I don't think anyone on OTF has ever suggested that, and certainly not on this thread

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by Flynnie View Post
    Well yeah dude, that’s because it was a massive bit of whataboutery.
    Well the thread diversion into the creation of PL wasn’t instigated by me. I have contributed to it certainly, but I’ve not tried to camouflage City’s financial behaviour by comparison. My feelings about the current City issue were made quite clear before the PL discussion even began.

    Leave a comment:


  • Flynnie
    replied
    I’m just tired of the Premier League being some kind of original sin that excuses all other subsequent actions. None of the original decision makers are even still around their clubs as far as I can tell. You might as well rail against broken-time payments.

    Particularly when it’s a City fan. I’m not talking about today’s City, I mean the City that played in one of the 10 largest grounds in the country in Maine Road and clearly would have done very well out of TV rights had they not been inept.

    Leave a comment:


  • caja-dglh
    replied
    It is always valuable to have arguments about who is football's best millionaire egotist overlord. See this one is really good on social and corporate governance and is not at all in it for himself...

    Leave a comment:


  • Flynnie
    replied
    Well yeah dude, that’s because it was a massive bit of whataboutery.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by G-Man View Post

    For all the iniquities created by the Premier League, and all the moral reservations you and I share, its establishment was not some kind of tax cheat.
    I obviously didn’t say that. I was using a broad comparison. The Big Six took advantage of weak governance for their own financial ends in the same way a tax dodger exploits weak governance to
    find loopholes. I was making a moral equivalence not a literal one.

    Similarly I am fully aware that other clubs voted for PL gravy train but as the Big Six instigated the whole idea it’s not unreasonable to consider them more culpable.

    None of which is particularly relevant in the context of this thread anyway. The more I harp on about the formation of the PL the more it seems like a diversion - whataboutery if you wish - and I have no intention of doing that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Discordant Resonance
    replied
    The interesting aspect is that four of the initial "Big Five" favoured ITV over Sky as the Premier League broadcaster, which would have made no difference to the remaining 72, but may have tempered the subsequent Lucullan excesses.

    Leave a comment:


  • G-Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Tony C View Post

    The ‘Big Six’ exploited the desperate weakness of English football administration to enforce the most exploitative, self-rewarding project imaginable. Your notion of them being able to “capitalise on the windfalls of their scheme” is akin to showering praise on a tax dodger who cynically found loopholes in the tax system to save himself millions but spent the money well.
    That's nonsense, and you should know better. For all the iniquities created by the Premier League, and all the moral reservations you and I share, its establishment was not some kind of tax cheat. It was naked capitalism embraced by almost all founding clubs, including the one you supported. To reduce the iniquity to the five instigators only is, to use your terminology, disingenuous. They led the process, but almost all clubs in the Premier League that season benefited from it financially. That's why they voted for it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kowalski
    replied
    Has Noel Gallagher made one of his pithy putdowns yet?

    Leave a comment:


  • EIM
    replied
    Originally posted by Tony C View Post

    Hated? I thought City were a minor irritation at most?
    We've both been on this board for a long time, TC.

    Leave a comment:


  • EIM
    replied
    Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
    I remember when you couldn't be bothered to care about them
    Yeah. Fingers crossed that's the case after this case is finished too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by EIM View Post

    Just to clarify, I have no interest in claiming any sort of vicarious moral superiority, I'm just laughing at a hated rival get dumped on. Cheers.
    Hated? I thought City were a minor irritation at most?

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    I remember when you couldn't be bothered to care about them

    Leave a comment:


  • EIM
    replied
    Originally posted by Foot of Astaire's View Post
    I'm seeing a lot of Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool fans, amongst others, gleefully reporting this and hoping to see an end to City's financial doping and dominance. The thing is, those 3 in particular, were at the forefront of driving the Champions League cartel. A competition designed to make them and the other European elite clubs a shed load of money whilst doing its utmost to prevent anyone else getting in on the act.

    The suggestion that City's success has been bought but theirs was somehow morally superior and earnt. They're not getting the genie back in the bottle. They may as well let City off and Newcastle too, in a few years no doubt.
    Just to clarify, I have no interest in claiming any sort of vicarious moral superiority, I'm just laughing at a hated rival get dumped on. Cheers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by Reginald Christ View Post

    Very much so, yes. The point I was trying to make was that if you're a massive club that's suddenly confronted with an existential crisis it helps if you have a mythic sense of your own importance to fall back on because it can galvanise your team. Not many clubs have that (I'm also not saying that it's necessarily a good thing to have) and I don't think Manchester City are one of them.
    Nicely put and I agree completely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by Nocturnal Submission View Post


    Hmmmmm, all sounds very fishy to me.
    Okay, okay, I saw and edited. God, it takes you seconds doesn’t it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nocturnal Submission
    replied
    Originally posted by Tony C View Post

    Absolutely. A clean skate would have suited them nicely.

    Hmmmmm, all sounds very fishy to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Johnny Velvet
    replied
    Originally posted by Tony C View Post

    Not disputing that for a second, but isn’t that the case at 99% of professional clubs worldwide? Players at any level tend to choose their clubs based on financial considerations and opportunity to thrive amongst talented peers. As long as they train hard, look after themselves and play to the best of their ability isn’t that “love” enough?
    Very much so, yes. The point I was trying to make was that if you're a massive club that's suddenly confronted with an existential crisis it helps if you have a mythic sense of your own importance to fall back on because it can galvanise your team. Not many clubs have that (I'm also not saying that it's necessarily a good thing to have) and I don't think Manchester City are one of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by caja-dglh View Post

    It is why the fanbase that considers this a "witch hunt" is a mystery to me. This is like OPEC having to punish a member for overproducing oil. Everyone is meant to play nicely so the collective make a fortune. There is a lot at risk - cynically I would suggest this is a key contributor to why MCFC were supportive of the break-away.
    Absolutely. A clean slate would have suited them nicely.

    The online behaviour of many City fans doesn’t surprise me, they have a habit of circling the wagons and putting their fingers in their ears at times like this. A common response on the Bluemoon Forum over the last day or so had been “well I’m not listening to another football podcast or read another article for a few weeks” so denial is clearly rife. I guess the rest of the seven stages of grief will be on display soon enough.
    Last edited by Tony C; 07-02-2023, 19:09.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tony C
    replied
    Originally posted by Reginald Christ View Post
    This is good on how things might play out if a) City were found guilty b) there was sufficient will to punish them harshly and c) their legal team wasn't able to spare them.

    Everyone who is at City is there because they're being paid more money than they'd get anywhere else and because of the other talented players and coaches who are already in situ. Nobody is at City because they deeply love the club..
    Not disputing that for a second, but isn’t that the case at 99% of professional clubs worldwide? Players at any level tend to choose their clubs based on financial considerations and opportunity to thrive amongst talented peers. As long as they train hard, look after themselves and play to the best of their ability isn’t that “love” enough?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X