Generic small time football blather thread FOREVER

[The Fish 10856]

Honestly, I reckon they'll watch what happens with Man City. Wait for the dust to settle then plot their course appropriately. If Man City escape with only lip service punishments we'll chance our arm and use their penalty as a benchmark for acceptable costs. If the hammer comes down we'll keep our noses clean. If they escape without any real punishment you can look forward to a £700m per year stadium sponsorship.  

[Holden McGroin 6583]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

Honestly, I reckon they'll watch what happens with Man City. Wait for the dust to settle then plot their course appropriately. If Man City escape with only lip service punishments we'll chance our arm and use their penalty as a benchmark for acceptable costs. If the hammer comes down we'll keep our noses clean. If they escape without any real punishment you can look forward to a £700m per year stadium sponsorship.  

Why stop at £700m….how about…

 

[thebrokendoll 9203]

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Honestly, I reckon they'll watch what happens with Man City. Wait for the dust to settle then plot their course appropriately. If Man City escape with only lip service punishments we'll chance our arm and use their penalty as a benchmark for acceptable costs. If the hammer comes down we'll keep our noses clean. If they escape without any real punishment you can look forward to a £700m per year stadium sponsorship.  

 

I think it's bizarre that nowts been leaked with regard to man city's APT case as yet.

been expectations that it would've by now for weeks.

[The Fish 10856]

31 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

 

I think it's bizarre that nowts been leaked with regard to man city's APT case as yet.

been expectations that it would've by now for weeks.

Lawyers gotta get their money.

[Gemmill 44853]

Good scene-setting article by Nick Harris on his substack today, in preparation for the start of Man City's 115 charges hearing. 

 

https://sportingintelligence832.substack.com/p/manchester-citys-115-a-recap-and?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&utm_medium=email&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true

 

You might need to be subscribed to read it, I'm not sure. 

[thebrokendoll 9203]

howay the taffs, craig craig bellamy tra la la la...

 

 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgq250xljwno

[Howmanheyman 33173]

 

 

 

 

"You're trying to be Jamaican, aren't you?"

 

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

1 hour ago, Gemmill said:

Good scene-setting article by Nick Harris on his substack today, in preparation for the start of Man City's 115 charges hearing. 

 

https://sportingintelligence832.substack.com/p/manchester-citys-115-a-recap-and?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=posts-open-in-app&utm_medium=email&r=172gw&triedRedirect=true

 

You might need to be subscribed to read it, I'm not sure. 

 

 

Nick Harris gets a hard on thinking of Man City getting done. It's like a personal vendetta. 

 

Like Magic Tw#t, he seems completely oblivious to the possibility that City might not have disguised owner investment as sponsorship. Not so much that they might be innocent but that there might be no crime.

 

To counter Nick Harris https://mancitystuff.co.uk/the-flawed-case-against-manchester-city/  a good summary page with links to in-depth reasoning.

 

My perspective...

As far as i'm aware, and very roughly, all City's sponsorship deals are handled by ADUG on their behalf.

All sponsor payments are sent to ADUG (or CFG or whatever their name is).

ADUG invest money from this pot on City's behalf.  As you would with any pot of money.

City request money from their central pot as they need it. ( i think that is where the emails come in, but honestly i haven't a clue )

Leaving City to focus on football matters.

 

The Leicester case has at least shown that the argument of" the Premier League wouldn't charge you if they didn't think they had a good chance of winning" to be flawed.

 

oh and a decent start to the season by you guys, 7 from 9.

 

 

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

1 hour ago, thebrokendoll said:

howay the taffs, craig craig bellamy tra la la la...

 

 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgq250xljwno

 

 

loved Bellamy when he was at City.  you never quite knew what you'd get from him.

 

 

 

[Dazzler 9742]

3 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

 

loved Bellamy when he was at City.  you never quite knew what you'd get from him.

 

 

 

A lot of stuff written in half eaten crayon, I'd imagine.

[LondonBlue 772]

On 05/09/2024 at 09:23, thebrokendoll said:

 

I think it's bizarre that nowts been leaked with regard to man city's APT case as yet.

been expectations that it would've by now for weeks.

 

 

My take is that had City lost hands down, it would have been leaked straight away.

 

I suspect that City have been at least partially successful.

 

One possibility is that City have won and the delay is that the compensation part of the hearing is ongoing. I think City claim the PL rules blocked a sponsorship deal to the tune of £50m and want some sort of recompense. 

 

Another possibility is that City have lost and they're pissing themselves laughing.

 

 

 

[ewerk 30598]

12 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

perspective...

As far as i'm aware, and very roughly, all City's sponsorship deals are handled by ADUG on their behalf.

 

 

That sounds a bit dodgy to begin with.

[Dazzler 9742]

I hope you've won just so we get to witness Eddie Howe's shithousing corporate sponsorship mags tbh.

[Dazzler 9742]

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

 

That sounds a bit dodgy to begin with.

It's impressive that they've found a Glaswegian staffy capable of handling multi-million pound contract negotiations tbf.

[LondonBlue 772]

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

That sounds a bit dodgy to begin with.

 

i hear you. but it makes sense when you look at some of the contracts.  eg. Nissan have a central sponsorship deal with CFG so all the CFG clubs presumably  get a cut  Nissan and CFG

[LondonBlue 772]

9 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

I hope you've won just so we get to witness Eddie Howe's shithousing corporate sponsorship mags tbh.

 

 

it won't make that big a difference. i don't think. sponsorship would still have to be sensible, it's just the PL can't poo poo certain sponsors.

 

 

[Howmanheyman 33173]

I've heard somewhere that they've decided to just leave Man City alone as they're shit scared of losing fortunes plus opening a can of worms with other clubs, are going to legislate for Chelsea to have an extra month for transfers, are going to revisit Man United's COVID issue and award them a brand new stadium paid for by the the tax payer and the PL, are going to give Arteta two joker cards per match to overturn any hembarrassing and disgraceful decisions he doesn't like, going to give Spurs an extra spot in Europe but not for football just the Eurovision song contest for their 'oooooooooooooooooh wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen the Spuuuuuuuuuuuuurs go maaaaaaaaaaaaaaarching iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin' dirge as it's got similar vibes to some of the songs on there. The PL are also going to insist on 24/7 Liverpool football club coverage on every television, radio station in the UK whether they're playing or not with every football club in the UK having to now run out to 'you'll never walk alone'. Finally, NUFC will have to submit in writing, every transfer they may be thinking of to every chairman in advance as well as to every talk sport presenter. They'll have to also include their five year transfer strategy, how they'll pay for it, explain why they're not continuing with Mike Ashley's blueprint and why they refuse to not stop actively trying to grow into a big hitter. They're to be docked a point for every time they approach a possible new sponsor and another point for every time they actively try to beat any club called, Man United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs. 

[Gemmill 44853]

32 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

 

Nick Harris gets a hard on thinking of Man City getting done. It's like a personal vendetta. 

 

Like Magic Tw#t, he seems completely oblivious to the possibility that City might not have disguised owner investment as sponsorship. Not so much that they might be innocent but that there might be no crime.

 

To counter Nick Harris https://mancitystuff.co.uk/the-flawed-case-against-manchester-city/  a good summary page with links to in-depth reasoning.

 

My perspective...

As far as i'm aware, and very roughly, all City's sponsorship deals are handled by ADUG on their behalf.

All sponsor payments are sent to ADUG (or CFG or whatever their name is).

ADUG invest money from this pot on City's behalf.  As you would with any pot of money.

City request money from their central pot as they need it. ( i think that is where the emails come in, but honestly i haven't a clue )

Leaving City to focus on football matters.

 

The Leicester case has at least shown that the argument of" the Premier League wouldn't charge you if they didn't think they had a good chance of winning" to be flawed.

 

oh and a decent start to the season by you guys, 7 from 9.

 

 

 

 

 

I find him to be a pretty objective investigative journalist tbh. I'm not sure mancitystuff.co.uk will be providing me with an objective view though.

 

[LondonBlue 772]

2 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

I find him to be a pretty objective investigative journalist tbh. I'm not sure mancitystuff.co.uk will be providing me with an objective view though.

 

 

strange that he's never entertained the idea that we might be innocent. 

 

the city link is obviously biased ( doesn't mean its not correct ) but given the press seems pretty unanimous in it's condemnation of City we need the balance.

 

how many have you have actually read an article in defense of man city?   

 

i'd be curious as to if you see any blatant holes in the city link.

 

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

15 minutes ago, Howmanheyman said:

I've heard somewhere that they've decided to just leave Man City alone as they're shit scared of losing fortunes plus opening a can of worms with other clubs, are going to legislate for Chelsea to have an extra month for transfers, are going to revisit Man United's COVID issue and award them a brand new stadium paid for by the the tax payer and the PL, are going to give Arteta two joker cards per match to overturn any hembarrassing and disgraceful decisions he doesn't like, going to give Spurs an extra spot in Europe but not for football just the Eurovision song contest for their 'oooooooooooooooooh wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeen the Spuuuuuuuuuuuuurs go maaaaaaaaaaaaaaarching iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin' dirge as it's got similar vibes to some of the songs on there. The PL are also going to insist on 24/7 Liverpool football club coverage on every television, radio station in the UK whether they're playing or not with every football club in the UK having to now run out to 'you'll never walk alone'. Finally, NUFC will have to submit in writing, every transfer they may be thinking of to every chairman in advance as well as to every talk sport presenter. They'll have to also include their five year transfer strategy, how they'll pay for it, explain why they're not continuing with Mike Ashley's blueprint and why they refuse to not stop actively trying to grow into a big hitter. They're to be docked a point for every time they approach a possible new sponsor and another point for every time they actively try to beat any club called, Man United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs. 

 

funniest one i've seen is that tv companies may sue the premier league if man city lose the 115.

 

apparently the premier league should have notified the tv companies of their intention to sue city as it would affect the value of the broadcasting rights. 

 

aside from that being bollocks, it would be a hilarious turn of events.

 

 

 

[Gemmill 44853]

8 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

strange that he's never entertained the idea that we might be innocent. 

 

the city link is obviously biased ( doesn't mean its not correct ) but given the press seems pretty unanimous in it's condemnation of City we need the balance.

 

how many have you have actually read an article in defense of man city?   

 

i'd be curious as to if you see any blatant holes in the city link.

 

 

 

 

Every time I read something about it, and I follow Stefan whatsisface and have read his pushback, but every time I read something about it, I come away thinking that you've been up to no good. 

 

Time will tell, of course, and really it almost doesn't matter what you've done, it matters what the outcome of the hearing is. We'll know early next year by the look of it, when the hearing concludes. 

[Holden McGroin 6583]

1 hour ago, LondonBlue said:

 

 

Nick Harris gets a hard on thinking of Man City getting done. It's like a personal vendetta. 

 

Like Magic Tw#t, he seems completely oblivious to the possibility that City might not have disguised owner investment as sponsorship. Not so much that they might be innocent but that there might be no crime.

 

To counter Nick Harris https://mancitystuff.co.uk/the-flawed-case-against-manchester-city/  a good summary page with links to in-depth reasoning.

 

My perspective...

As far as i'm aware, and very roughly, all City's sponsorship deals are handled by ADUG on their behalf.

All sponsor payments are sent to ADUG (or CFG or whatever their name is).

ADUG invest money from this pot on City's behalf.  As you would with any pot of money.

City request money from their central pot as they need it. ( i think that is where the emails come in, but honestly i haven't a clue )

Leaving City to focus on football matters.

 

The Leicester case has at least shown that the argument of" the Premier League wouldn't charge you if they didn't think they had a good chance of winning" to be flawed.

 

oh and a decent start to the season by you guys, 7 from 9.

 

 

 

 

Didn't Leicester get out of the PSR on a technicality. I think they pushed the year end accounts to 30th June and as of the middle of June they were no longer a PL club. A big FUCK YOU to the PL and I love it.

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

1 minute ago, Holden McGroin said:

Didn't Leicester get out of the PSR on a technicality. I think they pushed the year end accounts to 30th June and as of the middle of June they were no longer a PL club. A big FUCK YOU to the PL and I love it.

 

 

 

 

You have to ask how the Premier League didn't predict that outcome.

 

 

[LondonBlue 772]

40 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

 

Every time I read something about it, and I follow Stefan whatsisface and have read his pushback, but every time I read something about it, I come away thinking that you've been up to no good. 

 

Time will tell, of course, and really it almost doesn't matter what you've done, it matters what the outcome of the hearing is. We'll know early next year by the look of it, when the hearing concludes. 

 

If we're found guilty we're doomed. doomed i say.

 

If we're found not guilty then we cheated and bribed out way out of it.

 

Either way we lose. The intention all along me thinks.

 

 

[Holden McGroin 6583]

Just now, LondonBlue said:

 

 

You have to ask how the Premier League didn't predict that outcome.

 

 

They still thought they could dock them points though.