Manchester City - 115 Charges (1 Viewer)

[David O'Day]

So where was that from?

Just had another look. All between 232m and 238m

that's their own published accounts

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Talksport suggesting a 60 points penalty is what’s being discussed. Sounds a bit tame

Big enough to be significant, small enough to keep Man City interested in surviving relegation to maintain integrity of matches. They were never going to be kicked out the premier league.

I think they need to have points deductions for the next 5 seasons personally, tapering it down every season. I. E 60, 50, 40, 20, 10

 

[San Francisco]

Talksport suggesting a 60 points penalty is what’s being discussed. Sounds a bit tame

That'd be a joke if true. They'd have a good chance of surviving. Expulsion really is the only fitting punishment imo.

 

[Briles]

Man City are the equivalent to that 10/10 you pull on a night out, then in the morning once theyve taken off their heels, eye lashes, extenstions, magic pants, push up bra and make up they look like Matt Lucas/Leicester City

 

[Lamps]

that's their own published accounts

As you said yourself the wage bill was about 233m. That's what is all over.

The rules are player wages and transfer fees, manager wages and cost of constantly sacking the manager, and also agents fees. Anything to do with the academy and academy players doesn't count. That's how they were able to spend so much in the summer.

The idea is the other 15% of income pays for everything else. I would be delighted if anyone could show any other expenses as I have never seen any.

 

[Grendel]

As you said yourself the wage bill was about 233m. That's what is all over.

The rules are player wages and transfer fees, manager wages and cost of constantly sacking the manager, and also agents fees. Anything to do with the academy and academy players doesn't count. That's how they were able to spend so much in the summer.

The idea is the other 15% of income pays for everything else. I would be delighted if anyone could show any other expenses as I have never seen any.

the wage bill is £408m

 

[CovValleyBoy]

That'd be a joke if true. They'd have a good chance of surviving. Expulsion really is the only fitting punishment imo.

60 would relegate them.
Of course it would. They get 90 less 60.
They're down.

 

[Tommo1993]

I’d personally back them to stay up after a 60 point hit. They’d be good enough for a 45-50 point finish which is enough

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

I’d personally back them to stay up after a 60 point hit. They’d be good enough for a 45-50 point finish which is enough

They're not going to get over 100 points in a season what an absurd prediction.

 

[CovValleyBoy]

Crikey we have some mathematicians amongst us.

 

[Grendel]

For context also Chelsea’s last published accounts so wages of £338 million.

 

[Grendel]

As you said yourself the wage bill was about 233m. That's what is all over.

The rules are player wages and transfer fees, manager wages and cost of constantly sacking the manager, and also agents fees. Anything to do with the academy and academy players doesn't count. That's how they were able to spend so much in the summer.

The idea is the other 15% of income pays for everything else. I would be delighted if anyone could show any other expenses as I have never seen any.

 

[Tommo1993]

They're not going to get over 100 points in a season what an absurd prediction.

Even if they strung up another 75 points for 90, 30 is possible survival.

Don’t get all pissy you little girl, they’d finish above us at least.

 

[CovValleyBoy]

Even if they strung up another 75 points for 90, 30 is possible survival.

Don’t get all pissy you little girl, they’d finish above us at least.

30 has never been enough.
Forest lowest, 32pts total to survive.

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

Even if they strung up another 75 points for 90, 30 is possible survival.

Don’t get all pissy you little girl, they’d finish above us at least.

I'm not getting pissy it's an objectively stupid point to claim they're capable of getting 110 points when not only the record is 100, but mathematically a club can only get 114.

No club has ever survived relegation after getting 30 points either. Nottingham Forest hold the record with 32.

If they received a -60 point deduction they're near enough guaranteed relegation.

 

[Tommo1993]

30 has never been enough.
Forest lowest, 32pts total to survive.

New records are set all the time either way. A sanction as such could give them siege mentality.

Main point is 60 point hit is very light handed.

 

[Paul Anthony]

30 has never been enough.
Forest lowest, 32pts total to survive.

The fact is it gives them even a possibility of staying up, which means it's incredibly lenient. They should be getting docked enough points to ensure they go down.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Think they're worried about being dragged through the courts for large damages. They deserve much more but can't see anything lower than the Championship.

Roughly half a point per charge, which would be an absolute joke, especially considering what they've received and earnt from the cheating. It'd even give them half a chance of staying up.

I feel pretty sure Forest, Everton and Chelsea would be making complaints given the punishments they've had for smaller offences.

 

[Nuskyblue]

They're not going to get over 100 points in a season what an absurd prediction.

Crikey we have some mathematicians amongst us.

 

[Briles]

View attachment a26fbbdd5637089f394a167e59a83e6d.mp4

 

[Cov. Kids. Never. Quit]

60 would relegate them.
Of course it would. They get 90 less 60.
They're down.

They already have 15 points, so if it was 60 points deduction they would only have to make up 45 points.

It should be 10 points for every year they broke the rules so that's minus 90 points deduction.

 

[Lamps]

Roughly half a point per charge, which would be an absolute joke, especially considering what they've received and earnt from the cheating. It'd even give them half a chance of staying up.

I feel pretty sure Forest, Everton and Chelsea would be making complaints given the punishments they've had for smaller offences.

I don't disagree with you at all. I just don't see them getting the punishment they deserve. Eckert should have got a ban but he got a small suspended sentence. Southampton seemed to know as they kept him as manager.

This summer Manchester City made £450m of new signings from an income of £677m. They took it to the max in what is allowed. This suggests to me that they will end up in the Championship and also get a transfer ban for maybe 3 or 5 years. The first year would be them in the Championship where every player they have would walk into any Championship side.

It might be considered harsh by some, but they now have a world class squad and an academy with some very good players coming through, Mfuni being one of them.

Would a club have a case of unfair punishment if it comes with a long transfer ban and a massive points deduction that takes them from a winning the title amount to relegation?

 

[Hybridtheory]

They already have 15 points, so if it was 60 points deduction they would only have to make up 45 points.

It should be 10 points for every year they broke the rules so that's minus 90 points deduction.

To get to zero points ! The psychological effect of being on -45 or whatever would be huge but anyhow I don't think we will know any punishment until the appeal is all done and the timeline published seems to suggest that is mid Jan

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

I don't disagree with you at all. I just don't see them getting the punishment they deserve. Eckert should have got a ban but he got a small suspended sentence. Southampton seemed to know as they kept him as manager.

This summer Manchester City made £450m of new signings from an income of £677m. They took it to the max in what is allowed. This suggests to me that they will end up in the Championship and also get a transfer ban for maybe 3 or 5 years. The first year would be them in the Championship where every player they have would walk into any Championship side.

It might be considered harsh by some, but they now have a world class squad and an academy with some very good players coming through, Mfuni being one of them.

Would a club have a case of unfair punishment if it comes with a long transfer ban and a massive points deduction that takes them from a winning the title amount to relegation?

You do realise this is Man United's revenue don't you? Once again parroting articles you don't understand. Man City's revenue was £694M in their latest set of accounts.

 

[Hybridtheory]

You do realise this is Man United's revenue don't you? Once again parroting articles you don't understand. Man City's revenue was £694M in their latest set of accounts.

He's only £18m off so not a lot really. The rest of the quote is fairly accurate

 

[Grendel]

He's only £18m off so not a lot really. The rest of the quote is fairly accurate

I assume he’s trying to relate 85% of spend to transfers. It’s surely net transfer spend isn’t it that is relevant.

 

[Hybridtheory]

I assume he’s trying to relate 85% of spend to transfers. It’s surely net transfer spend isn’t it that is relevant.

I don't know but in simpleton terms for me you divide those fees by 5 as that'll be the contract length so they'll be well within limits

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

He's only £18m off so not a lot really. The rest of the quote is fairly accurate

I mean he's been factually incorrect in quite literally every single post on this thread - all in the effort of pushing the irrelevant point that Man City will be compliant with SCR in the Championship.

Hence why I highlighted the turnover error as he's quite clearly copying Google AI / second rate journalists and trying to pass off whatever bile each spouts as his own opinion.

Putting to one side the hundreds of millions of £s wort of revenue they'll automatically lose overnight in the event that they are relegated, and the hundreds of millions of £s of transfer instalments they still owe, their squad value at a very rough estimate is probably in and around the £1BN mark and as such they'd be able to generate a mammouth amount in transfer fees if they were to find themselves in the Championship, while equally saving on wages.

I think what would also happen in that scenario is they’d look to loan players out until such time they find themselves back in the PL, which would help offset the wage bill further, while also appeasing those players that won't accept dropping down a level for a season but are equally happy to remain at the club long-term.

But it's an incredibly basic argument and doesn't account for any kind of variable.

It's also an argument that not only he's wasted hours compiling but is genuinely about as insightful as saying the sky is blue frankly.

 

[oakey]

Deduct
75 points this season
50 points next time in PL
25 points each PL season after that
Deductions expire after 10 years - 2037

Fine and transfer embargoes also for same 10 years

 

[oakey]

MCFC can survive all of that if they are properly managed. That's all they deserve - a chance to survive. Not a few years of turmoil then back to the top. Anything less is rewarding cheating.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Deduct
75 points this season
50 points next time in PL
25 points each PL season after that
Deductions expire after 10 years - 2037

Fine and transfer embargoes also for same 10 years

It's a thought that, as the charges relate to a nine year period, perhaps the punishment should too

 

[David O'Day]

I’d personally back them to stay up after a 60 point hit. They’d be good enough for a 45-50 point finish which is enough

that would work out as being more than the highest ever PL points total of 100 points

 

[edgy]

60 points isnt enough.

Seasons they would have survived:

• 2017-18 (40 pts)
• 2018-19 (38 pts)
• 2021-22 (33 pts)
• 2023-24 (31 pts)

Those four seasons were strong enough that even after losing 60 points they would likely have remained above the relegation line.

So, over the 10 most recently completed seasons, a 60-point deduction would have relegated Manchester City in 6 seasons and they would have survived in 4.

 

[KenilworthSkyBlue]

60 points isnt enough.

Seasons they would have survived:

• 2017-18 (40 pts)
• 2018-19 (38 pts)
• 2021-22 (33 pts)
• 2023-24 (31 pts)

Those four seasons were strong enough that even after losing 60 points they would likely have remained above the relegation line.

So, over the 10 most recently completed seasons, a 60-point deduction would have relegated Manchester City in 6 seasons and they would have survived in 4.

I think it's three times as Burnley finished on 35 points in 21/22.

However, it's comparing apples with toothpicks. I highly doubt they'd be able to hit 90+ points when contesting with the psychological battle of starting on -60 points and with the entire league despising them more than usual.

 

[Grendel]

I don't know but in simpleton terms for me you divide those fees by 5 as that'll be the contract length so they'll be well within limits

Yes the £450m is irrelevant as it’s the fee across contract length - also the sales are accounted for as well as net return so they are miles within the limit