What's new

Man City [Now Not] Banned From UCL For 2 years

bubble07

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2004
22,959
29,896
From The Athletic today. Delicious reading.

The obvious threat involves the stark possibility that some of their category-A players will wish to leave. Not a mass exodus, perhaps, when City still hold many attractions. But there are players in Pep Guardiola’s squad who are entitled to want a crack at the European Cup and do not wish to have their invitation withheld through no fault of their own. And who can blame them? Of course, those players are going to be wondering whether they want to hang around. Of course, they will be giving serious consideration to moving on.

Every player at City will have ambitions, dreams, targets. It is part of being an elite footballer and those free midweek nights are sure going to feel blank, demoralising in the extreme, when the Champions League anthem is playing elsewhere.

There is a difference, of course, between a footballer who is considering moving on and one who actually has the gumption to go through with it. Let’s also keep in mind that City still have an awful lot in their favour and any club with their wealth will always be in a position of strength. Heck, they might even knock Real Madrid out of the next round and win the damn thing this year. Which would be a considerably better form of protest than booing the Champions League anthem.

All the same, it is easy to understand why City’s supporters must be finding this all very unsettling when it is also threatening to affect their transfer plans for what was supposed to be an extensive summer of recruitment.

Those fans are a stoic bunch, on the whole, particularly the ones who might appreciate the fact that UEFA’s announcement came on the anniversary of the team losing 1-0 to Bury during the season, 1997-98, that ended with the team dropping into the old Second Division (now League One). As crises go, City have endured far worse. At least Guardiola does not have a drinks coaster shaped like a panic button, unlike Joe Royle, the manager who coined the phrase “Cityitis”.

These, however, are emotional times for the modern-day City and, as well as the near-unremitting speculation about Guardiola’s future, it has to be unnerving for the supporters when they are already having to contemplate the fact David Silva is now in his last three months with the club. Silva has worn City’s colours with such distinction one suggestion is that a statue of him, Vincent Kompany and Sergio Aguero should go up on the approach to the stadium.

Now, though, how many of Silva’s team-mates might be wondering, however strong their attachment to City, if there might be better adventures to be had elsewhere?

As difficult as this might be for City’s supporters to contemplate, what does Aguero make of it now he has reached the stage of his career when, even for the greatest players, insecurity can appear on the horizon?

Aguero has achieved many great things in his career but he is yet to experience the sweet-scented night of a Champions League final. He will be 34 when City’s ban expires and, to put it bluntly, time is not on his side. If he doesn’t feel that silver between his fingers this year, can he be blamed for wondering whether it might be time to reassess his options? And could City really take umbrage when this is a mess of their own making?

Aguero is the club’s record scorer, a four-time Premier League winner and a genuine history-maker if you understand why there are so many people in Manchester with “93:20” inked into different parts of their bodies. He has given the club such prodigious service over the past nine seasons he could probably be forgiven for thinking he deserves better. He certainly doesn’t deserve to miss out. None of the players do.

On Friday, just after the announcement from UEFA, City got in touch with all the relevant agents to ask them to stay calm and make sure the players did not say anything on social media. The players were then invited to a meeting at the club today. The club’s message was that they had always suspected there was a ban coming their way and that they were going to give UEFA a heck of a fight, starting with an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. All of which ties in with their public insistence that the evidence in their favour is “irrefutable” and they have suffered a huge injustice.

We will see. The agents are there to look after their players but, let’s be realistic, they can also earn millions in commission by arranging transfers. Raheem Sterling was already being linked with a move to Real Madrid before learning he will have to sit out the Champions League for two years. That speculation will undoubtedly now accelerate. There will also be scrutiny on Kevin De Bruyne at a time in his professional life when he is playing at the point of maximum expression. The Champions League would be weaker without his brilliance.

Nobody can be sure, yet, how this is all going to play out. All that can really be said for certain is that the best players, as a rule, want to play in the best competition. And that, for City, has to be a significant worry when there are people who know Bernardo Silva, for instance, and think it inconceivable that he will accept being out of the Champions League in the two years preceding the defining World Cup of his career.

“Expect players to be brutal, ruthless and act in their own interests,” one agent says. “Even the ones you think are nice.”

Leroy Sane, who was left out of Germany’s last World Cup squad, might also be thinking the same. Indeed, the events of the past few days could conceivably have made up his mind that it is time to leave Manchester.

Sane had been swaying in that direction anyway and, as if this whole process has not been galling enough for City, it is Bayern who are hoping to tempt him back to Bundesliga. The irony is not lost on City, who consulted lawyers last season when the then president, Uli Hoeness, was quoted saying that Sheikh Mansour paid for signings by ramping up the price of oil. City let it be known, via unnamed sources, it was the remark of a “smug, arrogant egotist”, which is probably an accurate gauge of relations between the two clubs.

As for Guardiola, imagine the pressure he will be under to regain the Premier League title from Liverpool if he keeps to his word and sticks around for another season. Guardiola was being deliberately contrary earlier this week when he floated the idea he could be sacked if his team lost to Madrid. He won’t be fired and nobody surely ever thought he would be. It would, however, confirm his reign in Manchester will not feature the trophy he craves the most and that will weigh on him heavily when, ultimately, this was why Abu Dhabi was so intent on bringing him to the club.

Eleven years since their takeover, City have managed only one Champions League semi-final so far and that was under Manuel Pellegrini. Guardiola, who is never good at hiding his feelings, can hardly feel enthused about the possibility of his time in Manchester ending this way — controversially, with a sizeable cloud hanging over the club and more debate, perhaps unfairly, about whether he has come up short. He has, in effect, only this season to shape that debate more to his liking.

At the very least, the ban leaves City with all sorts of financial complications bearing in mind the pay structure that the chief executive, Ferran Soriano, introduced after arriving at the club from Barcelona. City, like most clubs, operate a performance-related scheme that means players can earn significant bonuses, often in excess of £1 million, just for qualifying for the Champions League. Their pay automatically goes up for being involved in the competition and there are considerable bonuses dependent on how far the team goes.

The players, in other words, could now find themselves losing out on huge sums of money through no fault of their own. Guardiola, too, if he and his staff have the same arrangement in their contracts, which is highly likely. Behind the scenes, there is an expectation that Soriano and the director of football, Txiki Begiristain, will make sure the club cover everybody rather than risk the upset it might cause. But it is unconfirmed so far and the players are waiting to find out.

Add to that the amount of money the players could lose through personal endorsements and it is no wonder they and their agents might feel aggrieved. Adidas, for example, have a two-tier system that has City in the top range, with the likes of Spurs and Atletico Madrid a rung below, but that could conceivably change.

City, to go back to the earlier point, have been through worse and — with a nod to the football historian Gary James for this little fact — they have also faced heavier punishments for previous misdemeanours. In 1906, the club were caught making improper payments and 17 players were banned from playing for them ever again. The directors were ordered to resign and the chairman and secretary were barred from football sine die.

The secret, perhaps, is to avoid getting yourselves into trouble in the first place.

Article lost credibility by refering to our sponsors as being Adidas
 

bubble07

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2004
22,959
29,896
God I really hope this fucks them up. The owners deserve everything coming to them.

I think they should be relegated. Remember when Juventus, biggest club in Italy, were relegated for tapping up referees?

Is there really that much difference? In my view, it's the same. It's corruption. Cheating is cheating. No club is too big for the rules.

In basic terms, the rules of FFP state a club can only spend as much as they make. So losing out on £100m a year just from not playing in the Champions League, in theory, should handcuff them from making any big signings.

But the cynic in me still thinks City will find a way out of this.

But the damage is already done from their cheating by having world class players
 

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,134
146,042
Article lost credibility by refering to our sponsors as being Adidas

I think they were on about players sponsored by Adidas. Stands to reason that someone at a bigger club will get more exposure for the brand than someone at a smaller club. So Adidas have pay bands depending on which club you’re at.
 

bubble07

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2004
22,959
29,896
I think they were on about players sponsored by Adidas. Stands to reason that someone at a bigger club will get more exposure for the brand than someone at a smaller club. So Adidas have pay bands depending on which club you’re at.

That makes sense. I would assume sponsors would also have a club band too
 

Drink!Drink!

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2014
1,356
5,015
That Bluemoon makes for amusing reading -

It’s literally everyone else’s fault in the world that this has happened. Why can’t people be happy for us that we’ve found brilliant “investors” who are doing things the right way? Making even the most deluded of scousers seem like sane, normal fans!

The last couple of days have shown me that Man City have the most graceless, un self-aware and frankly moronic supporter base in the whole country.

They sit there taking billions from a human rights abuser who is in all the plots to destroy the football pyramid and create a “super league”, while blatantly breaking current competition rules as “doing things the right way”...as I say thick as pig crap
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,098
19,281
That's a fair opinion, but considering exclusion will cost City the best part of £100m for one season, and mean they'd make a substantial loss and have to dismantle their team and sell players to comply with FFP and not incur further punishment, there's no chance it happens until their series of appeals is done. Were they then found not guilty it would leave everyone involved open to prohibitive levels of legal action.

And what about the team that finishes 5th that would then be in CL? What about their loss.....
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Article lost credibility by refering to our sponsors as being Adidas

It didn't. It was talking personal endorsements. Players at city are on a higher tier because they are likely to win trophies.
 

1882andallthat

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2009
2,821
4,157
If they were relegated in this way from the PL, would they receive a Parachute Payment ? If they did, I couldn't think of a club more undeserving of receiving money in this way, I don't know the all the rules but something is logically telling me that their breach of FFP, if the EPL were to issue such a punishment would disqualify them automatically from receiving such a payment, and in my humble opinion, rightly so, but I could be proven to be wrong......
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
No one's lost anything, because until the appeal process has finished, the ban isn't final.

Have you got a source for that? Can't see anything that say's the ban will be suspended until the appeal is heard. They are not appealing to uefa but to an outside court.
 

jay2040

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,636
4,165
I dont think they deserve as much blame as those governing the game who allowed it to happen .
Punishment should also include taking away any trophies they won illegally.
 

jay2040

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,636
4,165
Im sorry, so you’re saying that what Man City have done is perfectly acceptable...?

I'm saying its irrelevant as we have to focus on winning every game possible. Its upto those governing the game to deem it acceptable or not!
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,888
62,569
I dont think they deserve as much blame as those governing the game who allowed it to happen .
Punishment should also include taking away any trophies they won illegally.
These things take literally years of investigation just to get to the point we've reached now. What are you going to do, suspend them for being under investigation when you know that verdict might not come for two or three years?

I don't see what the governing bodies could've done much differently here. It's the final punishment that will be interesting and what we can judge the governing bodies on. Like you I would like the crackdown to be so severe they end up losing titles and face relegation, but I unfortunately can't see any punishment being enforced retrospectively.
 

SugarRay

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2011
7,984
11,110
Which is why I said "it wouldn't have a financial impact".

It's not about the money, it's about the visual, the commentary.

I think it’s a great idea personally. It’s something that can’t be brushed under the carpet by the papers and tv
 

SugarRay

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2011
7,984
11,110
I dont think they deserve as much blame as those governing the game who allowed it to happen .
Punishment should also include taking away any trophies they won illegally.

The issue is they lied to those governing the game. They pretended they met the rules, but they lied in order to make it look like they met the rules, knowing full well they had not.

That’s worse than actually breaking the rules. It’s a scumbag move. Break the rules, face the music. Break the rules the hide it like a sneaky, coward fvck? To be fair, fitting for their owners
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
Lots of reporting that if CAS don't find in their favour, City will take this to the Swiss Supreme Court - meaning this will truly drag on for years and years.

Suspend them still pending the outcome. It will serve a small justice for the amount of times we and other teams missed out on top 4 and the lost revenue when they were illegally punchingnat the top.

2 of those 4 yeas they are being investigated for we finished fifth. Not a thought about the ones that missed out or got relegated through games they played and the footballers used through fraudulent actions is there?

Let them stew and whilst they fight against it, let them be on the receiving end of what they inflicted on others.
 

jay2040

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,636
4,165
The issue is they lied to those governing the game. They pretended they met the rules, but they lied in order to make it look like they met the rules, knowing full well they had not.

That’s worse than actually breaking the rules. It’s a scumbag move. Break the rules, face the music. Break the rules the hide it like a sneaky, coward fvck? To be fair, fitting for their owners

I agree that as they lied to those governing the game it is them that should show some balls as it just makes a mockery of the system.
 
Top