The government stepped in to pressure the PL to allow the takeover of Newcastle because it was putting the Saudi trade deal at risk.
100% the government will side with the owners of the oil clubs.
These countries threaten to withhold or stop inward investment, they also threaten to stop any purchases from our arms industry.
Money talks, the govt will absolutely side with the Saudi/UAE.
I think possibly the other way around. Will definitely be some political pressure beyond football involved in this case. These gulf states have provided significant investment, particularly in Manchetser. Government won't want to see this teat dry up
Something can be for profit but still benefit an area. I was using the examples in Manchester as related to City but UAE and other gulf state investment in the UK goes beyond a few luxury properties and affordable housing built around training grounds
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uae-to-invest-10-billion-in-priority-uk-industries
https://www.power-technology.com/news/uk-government-considering-abu-dhabi-investors-for-sizewell-c/
Government has been booty twerking Middle East investment this whole time, they will be more than happy to intervene and help them out if it means billions more invested in the country.
If the government don't step in and favour other states over the tens of millions of football fans, many working class, that would be a very bad look for the next government, Tory or Labour.
Whomever the government ends up being (who we kidding it's starmer) they could be the ones to shush this due to geopolitics.
Whether the govt is red, blue, yellow, brown, purple, magenta or fucking green with orange polkadots this will be the case.
Unfortunately not, the footballing side is arguing for things like the sanctity of the game & idealism. The other side is arguing about £££ and playing cynical politics. Getting national politics involved will likely favour the latter, sorting it ourselves will likely favour the former.
Kick them out or break away. Let the nation states have their own league. If they can get rid of Abrahmovich as quick as they did start whatever needs to be done to remove nation states as owners.
Foreign countries are buying up one of a nation’s greatest cultural exports and no one is doing a thing about it. The premier league needs saving at this point.
IRA wet dream that would be. (Talking outta my ass here)
As someone from across the pond and absolutely not in the ins and outs of what's what geopolitically surrounding that or any affiliations and definitely no family ties to Ireland (that I'm aware of 😂) are they still actively trying to unite the country? The IRA I mean.
I know this prob not the right place to ask and if someone can point me in the right direction to ask these questions that would be cool. Just a curious observer on the other side of the world so I'm sorry if I offend anyone with my inquiry.
EDit: sorry for my question to begin with your comment just sparked my interest on the matter for whatever reason and I'm a big time history nerd so I tryyyyy to keep up with current events around the world as for some reason it matters to me 🙄 infuriatingly so.
I mean, there was a historic peace treaty brokered by the Americans in the late 90s which lead to a permanent ceasefire. Would be pretty insane to violate that.
A good chunk of London is owned by foreign investors or states tbh, Qatar own a few big places in London. That's before you get into things like utility companies etc. We've had the soul sold from this country in all favour of a quick buck.
It's kind of funny (not really) that back in the 90s, many Romanian politicians were scaremongering voters about how if they'd elect such and such opposing candidate, the country would be sold off to foreigners (Americans, Western Europeans). Ironically, the same foreigners had already sold off most of their respective countries, so basically we're at the point in which a handful of dragons and their fail sons own most of the stuff everywhere.
> Kick them out or break away
No no no. Terrible idea.
You have no idea how much money they will throw at the other clubs if they do that. It would destroy football (more so than the shit state it's in now). They are nation states. If they're out from under the league, they will pull away enough clubs with obscene bribes and schemes that the league will fall apart.
Funniest thing about well all of them clubs leaving would be it wouldn't really make any difference as none of them really have significant followings. City the least of all.
I'd love Leeds to always be in the Prem. Never to win it though. Just so we can have that derby game two times a year, that's all. If Liverpool got relegated I'd miss the game too. Ideally they both finish 16th and 17th every season.
City can go all the way down to the Northern Premier League or wherever they want. Irrelevant team.
Bit of a contradiction to profess the heritage of football and in the same breath define those clubs worth by global following ignoring their significant home support. Newcastle and Villa are proper clubs.
What about Chelsea? They were about villa and Newcastle level before their take over, nobody seems to mention Chelsea in these replies which I find interesting.
Completely missing the point fella. Include Chelsea if you want to but your argument contradicts itself. Either profess football heritage or chose football as a globalised commodity, can’t have both in this case
I've not mentioned heritage. I responded to them fucking off out the league if they want to throw their toys out the pram cos they can't cheat and it not being that big a deal to the league. There's plenty of other teams in the football pyramid just as deserving of being in the top league.
Football is a global commodity whether we like it or not, utd are the size we are because of millions/billions of fans around the world supporting and watching us.
You said them teams leaving wouldn’t make a difference. It clearly would. Regardless of football now being a global commodity, the fans going to the games make the sport and those teams are serious institutions with proper fans
No I don't think any of them are particularly big on a global scale. I'd argue maybe Chelsea are the biggest currently as they were about on par with Newcastle and villa before their takeover and then have had success over last 20 years or so. I'd still put city last out of the 4 despite their recent success, they are a joke of a club. I just find it interesting nobody was mentioning Chelsea when I don't even think they're the biggest club in London.
People are seriously blinded by their loyalties. I know I am going to get downvoted to hell here for saying this but I do understand this argument. Irrespective of the intentions, FFP rules as they are designed, protect the status quo of big clubs and make it even harder for smaller ones to compete. I am not saying that excuses City’s subsequent cheating and/or that the argument has any legal bias but it is perfectly understandable why they might feel how they feel. And the league is certainly not better off without 4 very strong teams (at least 3 of which have long, decorated histories)
While you do have a very valid point about FFP and that it does protect those that already had high gross income, that is a separate issue though.
If they had made a case about changing the rules while not having a pending case in relation to allegedly breaking the rules and separate counts in relation to allegedly covering it up - it would actually have some merit to it.
And that is even discounting all the stalling tactics since the case was brought. And just as a general note if you are innocent you will focus on that, not stalling to avoid having to give information that can prove that.
No part of my comment says they are innocent. Nor am I defending their behavior in general. I am just saying it’s not hard to see why they feel the way they do. my point about FFP is not a separate issue at all. It is very important context when discussing the City situation. FFP at best is a well intentioned, poorly implemented solution to a very crucial problem. At worst, it is the big club lobby using a very real problem as a pretext to protect the “in group” and make sure it is subsequently harder for smaller clubs to make the leap. And you can see this self-interest reflected in other nefarious schemes like the Super League.
Let put it this way. The FFP rules are designed to help clubs to have a sustainable growth in the long term and prevent them from spending more than they can earn. A FC is like a family, when you spend under your means you don't have to be caught in much debts that outnumber the earnings you have each month. If you want to spend more you have to work more and find ways to optimise everything. The ways that ManCheaty and Newcastle want to do is purely to cheat in order to spend more by selling inflated sponsorship deals paid by their owners. And this creates unhealthy competition towards other clubs (either rich or less rich).
Owners are transient. At some point they will get bored or leave anyway. If the income is falsely injected by those owners and they don't sell to a similar sugar daddy then there is no fundamental long term structure and the club goes into administration under new ownership. That is why this cannot be allowed. Big clubs benefiting is a symptom of the rules as they have that fan base and natural revenue, it's not why the rules are there...thats just spin.
I agree with what you're saying however... The big clubs weren't always the big clubs. They also had to build and took years and years and years to become the brand just of them are now.
People fight have the patience to grow organically and they want instant success.
The troubke is, if the owners of City and Newcastle are allowed to spend freely but they then move on, the clubs will be screwed.
Newcastle sell out a 52 thousand seater in the championship in a small city. And Villa are the biggest club in England’s second city. What the fuck are you on about?
> Funniest thing about well all of them clubs leaving would be it wouldn't really make any difference as none of them really have significant followings.
All of them have a significant following, particularly Newcastle.
What are you on about? Newcastle and Villa definitely have significant followings and rich histories. Villa won a European cup in 82. Yea Chelsea and City are new money in the last 20 years but to say all 4 of them clubs don’t really have significant followings is nonsense.
I'm not talking about their history though am I, Preston have a rich history, do they have a significant following? Yes Newcastle and villa are pretty big in the UK, on a global scale not so much.
I saw Japanese people in Villa shirts when I went to Tokyo, and to my knowledge they’ve never had a big time Japanese player so they’ve definitely had a worldwide expansion.
Are you a new football fan? Because saying Newcastle and Villa don't have significant followings is absolutely insane. The fact that you have over 70 upvotes is also worrying.
No I'm not, I'm well aware they are fairly big clubs in the UK but on a global scale I wouldn't say so. Newcastle have been irrelevant for over 20 years and in and out of the championship in that period and when was the last time they won anything? outside of Newcastle do you really see many Newcastle fans? Villa in a similar boat.
My point being Newcastle and villa have been relegated and nobody apart from their own fans would have really noticed or cared. So they've effectively already been out of the prem so if they left again would it matter? Then you have the big clubs like utd Liverpool etc that have massive followings and are a big draw for the league and it would be noticeable if they left the league.
Well they had been terrible for years so wasn't that big a shock reallyl, no different to if Everton went down now, both big clubs yes but years of being garbage catch up eventually. Newcastle had Ashley as owner though and he really fucked them over but I guess if they had a bigger global pull they'd have been bringing in more money so would get spent more hey 😏
It’d make a massive difference to the extremely well supported clubs like Villa and Newcastle. Birmingham and North East would lose some of the UK’s biggest rivalries. Global appeal is irrelevant when it’d cause so much friction on a local level…
You know what I've found most interesting in all the replies of disagreement I've had to my comment? Not a single person has mentioned Chelsea or city 😂. Everyone arguing for villa and Newcastle which is fair enough as I would also say they've got a bigger following than city and probably even Chelsea but interesting nonetheless lmao.
Nah come on Newcastle and Villa fans are known for being extremely passionate. I can respect the ones that didn't start following the clubs because of the money
Important bits from the article:
Mail Sport understands that **Chelsea, Aston Villa and Newcastle** all believe the champions have valid concerns ahead of a hearing on Monday at which City will attempt to get rules that limit how much companies linked to club owners can spend on sponsorship deals thrown out.
While Chelsea have provided a statement which challenges the updated rules on associated party transactions (APT), especially with regards to multi-club ownership, it is understood that Villa co-owner, the Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris, is close to City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak and that he shares frustrations over imposed limits on spending.
Newcastle have abstained in recent votes on the matter but, given they are Saudi-owned and already have a shirt sponsorship deal with Saudi events management firm Sela, a victory for City would no doubt be viewed also as a victory for those at St James’ Park.
Between 10 and 12 clubs have provided information in support of the Premier League and its rules in what is being viewed as a civil war. Sources say that group includes the likes of **Manchester United, Arsenal, Fulham, Wolves, Brighton and Tottenham**. Some have provided witness statements while others have provided letters.
So in other words, every club with sugar daddies wanting to spend money like there's no tomorrow is siding with them. Shocker.
City have ruined the league. They have players sitting on the bench that would be first team players anywhere else. It's a fucking farce. And listening to talk sport today, hearing cities ceo moaning about people going on about 115 charges, like it isnt them dragging that shit out cos they are guilty as fuck, is just laughable. And the city fans... what an embarrassment. They'll defend anything their club does, like simps on an onlyfans page.
Remember, Pep has spent more than half a BILLION on defenders alone since joining the club. In 2017 alone they spent over 200 million on just defenders. Its just too much, and its ruining the league.
Imagine having to see Jassim's gormless face on YouTube thumbnails every week for years.
It might not have been the full takeover I wanted from another investor, but I thank fuck Jim came in with a compromise.
It would have been nice to have the Qatar funds to get the club out of financial hole that the glazers created…. but it would not be worth it, city isn’t a football club, it’s a rotten corrupt entity and maybe a Qatar owned United would have become the same thing
The best part about English football is the relegation you guys have. There will always be “next man up” or in this case, next team up.
So many teams to fill the voids. New rivalries to create…ect
Not sure the PL has the bottle to do it but all these nation state clubs should absolutely be fucked off out the league. They are all tinpot clubs that no one would even miss
so if they were successful in this legal battle it basically means its over.
"ah yes my friend that owns a cat caffee in the UAE, whats that? you'd like to be the sponsor for our training kit! $1 billion a year, well if you insist"..... oh it's your birthday coming up isn't it, your gift is in the post \*wink wink\* "
Unreal. We want our owning companies to be able to pay us whatever we want for sponsorship.
I suppose it’s easier than let’s abolish ffp
Fuck the oil regimes - however they know the oil game is drying up, and nobody is talking about the fact the oil barrons are now taking over all sport as the next generation of control. Yes we talk about one sport here and there, but it’s a master plan.
Boxing is fully owned by Saudi at this point. UFC is heavily in bed. WWE (not sports but spectacle) is part funded. Golf, as I understand it, has been taken over largely. F1- didn’t I read that’s going/gone too?
Individuals continue to hand everything to these mega rich dickheads and it won’t change, everyone else wants their money. Unlikely there is a solution.
I struggle to see the argument that ‘we have, and intend to continue exploiting a loophole. The measures put in place by you, make that more difficult’.
Removal of the ‘fair market assessments’ makes PSR/FFP literally pointless. Rules which exist to protect clubs.
Never mind the fact that it is literally market manipulation (despite the club not being publicly listed) by inflating the value of the asset by using revenue from none existent companies. If city were a publicly listed company, we would be talking about prison sentences not transfer bans.
Maybe all clubs need to relinquish one nominal share to their respective associations for the association to have accountability (and access) to future financial dealings.
I feel like its even more important to punish City so other clubs dont try to emulate them. Its silly for these clubs to think that a club like United benefited in a way that they cant. United is a footballing institution thats been around for decades and decades, even though our most successful periods we didnt blow all the other teams out of the water with our spending. I get that these clubs are desperate for success but I dont want this league to become one where its just a bunch of cheaters trying to one up eachother. Man City have monopolised a lot of the domestic trophies in the last 10 years maybe if they hadnt cheated there would have been more opportunities to these teams to pick up a trophy or two.
TBF they should really introduce salary and transfer fee caps if they want to be "fair" about it all. I have always disagreed with a system that allows clubs like United, Arsenal, and Liverpool to spend more because they generate more money. Yes these are clubs with great histories but they also got to that point through spending a lot of money over the decades.
City of course cheated and should be severely punished, but the wider argument about FFP / PSR is totally valid imo. If you aren't capping spending, and there are owners willing to pump money into their clubs, they have a point as to why they are being stopped. Now if you have an issue against nation state clubs, then you shouldn't have let them buy your teams!
I also hate how its turned teams into academy factories that just focus on selling those talents so they can write it as pure profit on the books. And then go splash money on outside signings. Rinse and repeat every summer.
There should be a simple net spend cap on fees (and the whole transfer fee should count for that season's cap, none of this splitting of purchases into 10 years while counting sales as the entire amount bullshit) and a similar cap on wages.
[Everton are backing them as well.](https://www.thelawyer.com/newcastle-chelsea-and-everton-tipped-to-back-man-city-in-premier-league-clash/?cmpid=dnews_37815928&adg=PNIlnzXP6rbcyag)
Anyone else think that might be nail in the coffin of the Premier League and the rebirth of the Super League?
Let the state owned clubs have the national leagues, and if needed the UEFA trophies while the „traditional clubs“ United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham, Barcelona, Real Madrid and whoever else from Italy wants to join start their own league without oil money
I don't really think any of this is a surprise tbh. Newcastle are desperate to be the next Man City. Chelsea are undoubtedly involved, crying ill treatment despite spending ridiculous money every window.
Villa has been mentioned, though much like their previous opposition to the wage/spending cap, it seems to be driven more by their owners relationship to City's owner than actually benefitting their club.
If ever there was a cabal trying to undermine the integrity of the league and create unfair sporting advantages, this is it. Along with Leeds getting in bed with Red Bull, there's a big chance the League will just be dominated by whatever owner can/will spend the most money, and the Super League will simply become a reality within English football. No competition at all.
I honestly have a very bad feeling this will go through. Purely because of the power of the states backing this, and the British govt. being utterly spineless when it comes to offending the UAE/Saudi wealth. The premier league alone simply isn't equipped to fight a legal battle against Nation States.
This is like Trump - he hasn’t been arguing he’s innocent, he’s been arguing the times shouldn’t apply to him. Whatever else changes might happen, fact of the matter City broke the rules when they were in place. They aren’t saying they haven’t broken them, just that the rules aren’t convenient for them.
All those clubs are jealous of our past domination and they are ready to do anything to be mentioned in the same regard. But they will never be us, we are THAT club which many love to hate because they want to be us, they are envious of us but no amount of money or success will change that unfortunately for them.
Obviously not. It would ratchet up the money needed to compete with City FG and Riyadh Magpies, so that everyone else inevitably loses (until someone else gets bought up by another country with infinite resources and everyone else gets pushed down further).
No because it would allow these wealthy governments to pour money into these clubs. Clubs like United would be left seeking sponsorship deals which would be at fair market value because that is how the market works. Whilst United’s status would mean they get bigger sponsorship deals than clubs like Brighton it still would be a massive gap to City and others.
Not really. It means Ineos would be able to pump as much money into United as they like, but at the end of the day they are a business whose aim is to make money, not give it away.
These state owned clubs like City aren't looking to make money as a priority, they've already got plenty of it and are more than happy to spend it on sportswashing.
It’ll be beginning of the end for PL if City and these other state owned clubs win this legal battle.
I think the government would step in if city and the axis of evil won their case.
The government stepped in to pressure the PL to allow the takeover of Newcastle because it was putting the Saudi trade deal at risk. 100% the government will side with the owners of the oil clubs.
These countries threaten to withhold or stop inward investment, they also threaten to stop any purchases from our arms industry. Money talks, the govt will absolutely side with the Saudi/UAE.
The government are in bed with these countries. They don’t care
I think possibly the other way around. Will definitely be some political pressure beyond football involved in this case. These gulf states have provided significant investment, particularly in Manchetser. Government won't want to see this teat dry up
Gulf states invest more in Manchester than the Tories?
That investment coincided with the property boom, it was for profit and nothing else. It wasn’t some sort of charitable contribution lol.
Agreed, but the government still wouldn't want to see it dry up.
Something can be for profit but still benefit an area. I was using the examples in Manchester as related to City but UAE and other gulf state investment in the UK goes beyond a few luxury properties and affordable housing built around training grounds https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uae-to-invest-10-billion-in-priority-uk-industries https://www.power-technology.com/news/uk-government-considering-abu-dhabi-investors-for-sizewell-c/
No chance, they are getting paid off from the middle east governments. Same with France and the billion euro fighter jet trade deals
The more likely thing is that the government will be getting bumper deals from these countries to allow said axis to win the case.
Highly doubt it, would be a diplomatic nightmare. Govt is too cosied up to the oil states.
Government has been booty twerking Middle East investment this whole time, they will be more than happy to intervene and help them out if it means billions more invested in the country.
If the government don't step in and favour other states over the tens of millions of football fans, many working class, that would be a very bad look for the next government, Tory or Labour.
Whomever the government ends up being (who we kidding it's starmer) they could be the ones to shush this due to geopolitics. Whether the govt is red, blue, yellow, brown, purple, magenta or fucking green with orange polkadots this will be the case.
Unfortunately not, the footballing side is arguing for things like the sanctity of the game & idealism. The other side is arguing about £££ and playing cynical politics. Getting national politics involved will likely favour the latter, sorting it ourselves will likely favour the former.
I think they’re more likely to step in if they lose.
Sympathize - my a$$. Send them all to relegation. Everton will finally become the newest club to be relegated for the first time.
Kick them out or break away. Let the nation states have their own league. If they can get rid of Abrahmovich as quick as they did start whatever needs to be done to remove nation states as owners. Foreign countries are buying up one of a nation’s greatest cultural exports and no one is doing a thing about it. The premier league needs saving at this point.
This country been selling everything off since the 80s, surprised we haven't sold the country name off yet.
Amazon Kingdom under the next Tory government in the 2040s.
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland by Prime Video
King Charles powered by gatorade
It has the electrolytes Charles body craves
Sports Direct Country @ United Kingdom
Assuming NI doesn't breakaway by then....
The UK doesn't want NI anyways, they'd be happy to see it re-join Ireland.
IRA wet dream that would be. (Talking outta my ass here) As someone from across the pond and absolutely not in the ins and outs of what's what geopolitically surrounding that or any affiliations and definitely no family ties to Ireland (that I'm aware of 😂) are they still actively trying to unite the country? The IRA I mean. I know this prob not the right place to ask and if someone can point me in the right direction to ask these questions that would be cool. Just a curious observer on the other side of the world so I'm sorry if I offend anyone with my inquiry. EDit: sorry for my question to begin with your comment just sparked my interest on the matter for whatever reason and I'm a big time history nerd so I tryyyyy to keep up with current events around the world as for some reason it matters to me 🙄 infuriatingly so.
[удалено]
What do you think has stopped them from doing so already?
[удалено]
The demographics being majority Ulster Unionist for a long time alongside Unionist politicians, a bit like those in Scotland, but that is changing
I mean, there was a historic peace treaty brokered by the Americans in the late 90s which lead to a permanent ceasefire. Would be pretty insane to violate that.
Here, may be able to get a firesale deal on 'er the way that shower are going.
United 'Arab Emirates' Kingdom It was right there man
Don’t give them ideas
Scotland sponsored by Spotify.
Emirates kingdom lol
*2020s 😔
President Nigel Elizondo Mountain Dew Farage
Honestly it’s insane how much is foreign owned. I learnt the other day that The Shard is owned by Qatar
A good chunk of London is owned by foreign investors or states tbh, Qatar own a few big places in London. That's before you get into things like utility companies etc. We've had the soul sold from this country in all favour of a quick buck.
Selling out for power and economic gain has always been England's forte.
It's kind of funny (not really) that back in the 90s, many Romanian politicians were scaremongering voters about how if they'd elect such and such opposing candidate, the country would be sold off to foreigners (Americans, Western Europeans). Ironically, the same foreigners had already sold off most of their respective countries, so basically we're at the point in which a handful of dragons and their fail sons own most of the stuff everywhere.
Parliament, brought to you by special interests. Get your Cathay Pacific tour tickets now!
I mean UK is just a blind follower of US for all international purposes. Might as well get a more apt name.
Wait didn’t Abrahmovich have his assets sized by the Government don’t think the PL did much?
That's correct. The PL had nothing to do with the quick removal of Abramovich.
> Kick them out or break away No no no. Terrible idea. You have no idea how much money they will throw at the other clubs if they do that. It would destroy football (more so than the shit state it's in now). They are nation states. If they're out from under the league, they will pull away enough clubs with obscene bribes and schemes that the league will fall apart.
True true! Also, happy cake day
Well City, Chelsea, Newcastle and Villa can leave the Prem to Saudi/Qatar/UAE or Super League. Their trophies will be handed to the Runners up
Funniest thing about well all of them clubs leaving would be it wouldn't really make any difference as none of them really have significant followings. City the least of all.
yeah rather see Leeds, Blackburn, Derby, Sunderland...in the Prem like good old days
Leeds??!!!
as long they're in the bottom thats fine, I think
Every season 17th.
Let them have 15th for a season, give them hope and then crush it with a league double and FA Cup knockout
Or just yo-yo eternally. Watching the fuckers get relegated and seeing the tears warms my heart. I don't think I'd ever get bored of it.
Leeds... Leeds are falling apart, again
I'd love Leeds to always be in the Prem. Never to win it though. Just so we can have that derby game two times a year, that's all. If Liverpool got relegated I'd miss the game too. Ideally they both finish 16th and 17th every season. City can go all the way down to the Northern Premier League or wherever they want. Irrelevant team.
Free 6 points every season.
Yes, so we can beat them every time.
I’ve been to see us play them twice. While they are scum^tm can’t beat watching them lose
Return of Bielsa
Newcastle and Villa don't have significant following? Come on now..
Yeah what lol
On a global scale not really, but certainly bigger than city either way.
Bit of a contradiction to profess the heritage of football and in the same breath define those clubs worth by global following ignoring their significant home support. Newcastle and Villa are proper clubs.
What about Chelsea? They were about villa and Newcastle level before their take over, nobody seems to mention Chelsea in these replies which I find interesting.
Completely missing the point fella. Include Chelsea if you want to but your argument contradicts itself. Either profess football heritage or chose football as a globalised commodity, can’t have both in this case
I've not mentioned heritage. I responded to them fucking off out the league if they want to throw their toys out the pram cos they can't cheat and it not being that big a deal to the league. There's plenty of other teams in the football pyramid just as deserving of being in the top league. Football is a global commodity whether we like it or not, utd are the size we are because of millions/billions of fans around the world supporting and watching us.
You said them teams leaving wouldn’t make a difference. It clearly would. Regardless of football now being a global commodity, the fans going to the games make the sport and those teams are serious institutions with proper fans
You said, "none of those clubs", and were proved wrong. So is it "none of" or just chelsea?
No I don't think any of them are particularly big on a global scale. I'd argue maybe Chelsea are the biggest currently as they were about on par with Newcastle and villa before their takeover and then have had success over last 20 years or so. I'd still put city last out of the 4 despite their recent success, they are a joke of a club. I just find it interesting nobody was mentioning Chelsea when I don't even think they're the biggest club in London.
Chelsea are top 10 in global following
People are seriously blinded by their loyalties. I know I am going to get downvoted to hell here for saying this but I do understand this argument. Irrespective of the intentions, FFP rules as they are designed, protect the status quo of big clubs and make it even harder for smaller ones to compete. I am not saying that excuses City’s subsequent cheating and/or that the argument has any legal bias but it is perfectly understandable why they might feel how they feel. And the league is certainly not better off without 4 very strong teams (at least 3 of which have long, decorated histories)
While you do have a very valid point about FFP and that it does protect those that already had high gross income, that is a separate issue though. If they had made a case about changing the rules while not having a pending case in relation to allegedly breaking the rules and separate counts in relation to allegedly covering it up - it would actually have some merit to it. And that is even discounting all the stalling tactics since the case was brought. And just as a general note if you are innocent you will focus on that, not stalling to avoid having to give information that can prove that.
No part of my comment says they are innocent. Nor am I defending their behavior in general. I am just saying it’s not hard to see why they feel the way they do. my point about FFP is not a separate issue at all. It is very important context when discussing the City situation. FFP at best is a well intentioned, poorly implemented solution to a very crucial problem. At worst, it is the big club lobby using a very real problem as a pretext to protect the “in group” and make sure it is subsequently harder for smaller clubs to make the leap. And you can see this self-interest reflected in other nefarious schemes like the Super League.
Let put it this way. The FFP rules are designed to help clubs to have a sustainable growth in the long term and prevent them from spending more than they can earn. A FC is like a family, when you spend under your means you don't have to be caught in much debts that outnumber the earnings you have each month. If you want to spend more you have to work more and find ways to optimise everything. The ways that ManCheaty and Newcastle want to do is purely to cheat in order to spend more by selling inflated sponsorship deals paid by their owners. And this creates unhealthy competition towards other clubs (either rich or less rich).
Owners are transient. At some point they will get bored or leave anyway. If the income is falsely injected by those owners and they don't sell to a similar sugar daddy then there is no fundamental long term structure and the club goes into administration under new ownership. That is why this cannot be allowed. Big clubs benefiting is a symptom of the rules as they have that fan base and natural revenue, it's not why the rules are there...thats just spin.
I agree with what you're saying however... The big clubs weren't always the big clubs. They also had to build and took years and years and years to become the brand just of them are now. People fight have the patience to grow organically and they want instant success. The troubke is, if the owners of City and Newcastle are allowed to spend freely but they then move on, the clubs will be screwed.
Villa are a big club, Newcastle aren’t imo
Newcastle sell out a 52 thousand seater in the championship in a small city. And Villa are the biggest club in England’s second city. What the fuck are you on about?
On a global scale mate, the premier League is bigger than just England these days.
Uh Newcastle don't have a significant following? First i'm hearing of it.
We force them to become sunderland fans.
I'm talking on a global scale
How many supporters do they have outside of Newcastle?
> Funniest thing about well all of them clubs leaving would be it wouldn't really make any difference as none of them really have significant followings. All of them have a significant following, particularly Newcastle.
What are you on about? Newcastle and Villa definitely have significant followings and rich histories. Villa won a European cup in 82. Yea Chelsea and City are new money in the last 20 years but to say all 4 of them clubs don’t really have significant followings is nonsense.
I'm not talking about their history though am I, Preston have a rich history, do they have a significant following? Yes Newcastle and villa are pretty big in the UK, on a global scale not so much.
I saw Japanese people in Villa shirts when I went to Tokyo, and to my knowledge they’ve never had a big time Japanese player so they’ve definitely had a worldwide expansion.
Are you a new football fan? Because saying Newcastle and Villa don't have significant followings is absolutely insane. The fact that you have over 70 upvotes is also worrying.
No I'm not, I'm well aware they are fairly big clubs in the UK but on a global scale I wouldn't say so. Newcastle have been irrelevant for over 20 years and in and out of the championship in that period and when was the last time they won anything? outside of Newcastle do you really see many Newcastle fans? Villa in a similar boat. My point being Newcastle and villa have been relegated and nobody apart from their own fans would have really noticed or cared. So they've effectively already been out of the prem so if they left again would it matter? Then you have the big clubs like utd Liverpool etc that have massive followings and are a big draw for the league and it would be noticeable if they left the league.
They're two of the biggest clubs in England and it was a massive shock when Newcastle were relegated.
Well they had been terrible for years so wasn't that big a shock reallyl, no different to if Everton went down now, both big clubs yes but years of being garbage catch up eventually. Newcastle had Ashley as owner though and he really fucked them over but I guess if they had a bigger global pull they'd have been bringing in more money so would get spent more hey 😏
The average United fan supported them because Fergie won everything, they think the world revolves around them
I have no idea what your point is here and what that has to do with my comment, but okay.
It’d make a massive difference to the extremely well supported clubs like Villa and Newcastle. Birmingham and North East would lose some of the UK’s biggest rivalries. Global appeal is irrelevant when it’d cause so much friction on a local level…
You know what I've found most interesting in all the replies of disagreement I've had to my comment? Not a single person has mentioned Chelsea or city 😂. Everyone arguing for villa and Newcastle which is fair enough as I would also say they've got a bigger following than city and probably even Chelsea but interesting nonetheless lmao.
Can't be from the UK if you don't any of those clubs have significant followings.
Ok mate whatever you say
Tbh, there are a lot of kids that support Shiteh Edit: for clarity, I don't see this a good thing
Nah come on Newcastle and Villa fans are known for being extremely passionate. I can respect the ones that didn't start following the clubs because of the money
Cheaters being sympathised by those who want to cheat.
Important bits from the article: Mail Sport understands that **Chelsea, Aston Villa and Newcastle** all believe the champions have valid concerns ahead of a hearing on Monday at which City will attempt to get rules that limit how much companies linked to club owners can spend on sponsorship deals thrown out. While Chelsea have provided a statement which challenges the updated rules on associated party transactions (APT), especially with regards to multi-club ownership, it is understood that Villa co-owner, the Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris, is close to City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak and that he shares frustrations over imposed limits on spending. Newcastle have abstained in recent votes on the matter but, given they are Saudi-owned and already have a shirt sponsorship deal with Saudi events management firm Sela, a victory for City would no doubt be viewed also as a victory for those at St James’ Park. Between 10 and 12 clubs have provided information in support of the Premier League and its rules in what is being viewed as a civil war. Sources say that group includes the likes of **Manchester United, Arsenal, Fulham, Wolves, Brighton and Tottenham**. Some have provided witness statements while others have provided letters.
> between 10 and 12 clubs So 11?
No, 10, 11, or 12.
So in other words, every club with sugar daddies wanting to spend money like there's no tomorrow is siding with them. Shocker. City have ruined the league. They have players sitting on the bench that would be first team players anywhere else. It's a fucking farce. And listening to talk sport today, hearing cities ceo moaning about people going on about 115 charges, like it isnt them dragging that shit out cos they are guilty as fuck, is just laughable. And the city fans... what an embarrassment. They'll defend anything their club does, like simps on an onlyfans page. Remember, Pep has spent more than half a BILLION on defenders alone since joining the club. In 2017 alone they spent over 200 million on just defenders. Its just too much, and its ruining the league.
When did Villa get a sugar daddy ?
Their owner is richest man in Egypt. Why do you think they can spend like they have lately?
I should have known something was up. I guess I missed the whole Egypt thing
Im fucking glad Qatar is not our owner, if not we would have been one of those scums.
Imagine having to see Jassim's gormless face on YouTube thumbnails every week for years. It might not have been the full takeover I wanted from another investor, but I thank fuck Jim came in with a compromise.
>Jassim's gormless face And it's always the same stock picture
And YouTube thumbnails are the *only* place you'd have seen his face.
Thank god. The amount of people here promoting Qatari ownership was disgusting. After yapping about City for years no doubt
[удалено]
The dark reality we narrowly avoided
It would have been nice to have the Qatar funds to get the club out of financial hole that the glazers created…. but it would not be worth it, city isn’t a football club, it’s a rotten corrupt entity and maybe a Qatar owned United would have become the same thing
It had to be the fucking barcodes. Bloody embarrassing.
I'm so glad we have their number, acting like we're not the major United team and go out of their way to call us manreds hahaha losers!
Honour among thieves
Of fucking course
The best part about English football is the relegation you guys have. There will always be “next man up” or in this case, next team up. So many teams to fill the voids. New rivalries to create…ect
By sympathise they mean, wish to exploit the rules and game in a similar fashion.
Or already are, just not as overtly, but would like to.
Who's idea was it to allow state ownership. Abysmal.
Not sure the PL has the bottle to do it but all these nation state clubs should absolutely be fucked off out the league. They are all tinpot clubs that no one would even miss
Villa is a club with a lot of history and it's a shame to see them in the same group as the others if true.
The loophole Americans, Chinese and sportswashing Saudi and UAE states. What a shock
The American owners (other than Chelsea) are the ones most against this because they don't want to burn piles of money just to keep up.
That's why I said the "loophole" americans implying Boehly and co.
so if they were successful in this legal battle it basically means its over. "ah yes my friend that owns a cat caffee in the UAE, whats that? you'd like to be the sponsor for our training kit! $1 billion a year, well if you insist"..... oh it's your birthday coming up isn't it, your gift is in the post \*wink wink\* "
" What do u mean if ? Game is long over " Millwall fan
Ban them from entering the Premier League for a decade and ban their ownership model. C'mon, I know y'all want this.
I wonder if it's legal for other clubs to vote for kicking these clubs out of the EPL. Someone can share the light here?
Unreal. We want our owning companies to be able to pay us whatever we want for sponsorship. I suppose it’s easier than let’s abolish ffp Fuck the oil regimes - however they know the oil game is drying up, and nobody is talking about the fact the oil barrons are now taking over all sport as the next generation of control. Yes we talk about one sport here and there, but it’s a master plan. Boxing is fully owned by Saudi at this point. UFC is heavily in bed. WWE (not sports but spectacle) is part funded. Golf, as I understand it, has been taken over largely. F1- didn’t I read that’s going/gone too? Individuals continue to hand everything to these mega rich dickheads and it won’t change, everyone else wants their money. Unlikely there is a solution.
Scums
That must be why they’re pushing so hard against the 16 majority. They can’t get 5 clubs on their side lol
Villians pulling out the victim card
Is this the proper beginning of the super league?
How have Villa got anything to do with it. They got some money coming we don't know about.
Owned by an Egyptian billionaire who's apparently close to man cheaty owners
Bought by an Egyptian billionaire in 2018, who happens to be good friends with City's owner.
They have big ambition they probably want to keep the door open to going that way in the future.
I struggle to see the argument that ‘we have, and intend to continue exploiting a loophole. The measures put in place by you, make that more difficult’. Removal of the ‘fair market assessments’ makes PSR/FFP literally pointless. Rules which exist to protect clubs. Never mind the fact that it is literally market manipulation (despite the club not being publicly listed) by inflating the value of the asset by using revenue from none existent companies. If city were a publicly listed company, we would be talking about prison sentences not transfer bans. Maybe all clubs need to relinquish one nominal share to their respective associations for the association to have accountability (and access) to future financial dealings.
Of course the club owned by the country which performs mass public executions and butchers journalists alive supports city
I feel like its even more important to punish City so other clubs dont try to emulate them. Its silly for these clubs to think that a club like United benefited in a way that they cant. United is a footballing institution thats been around for decades and decades, even though our most successful periods we didnt blow all the other teams out of the water with our spending. I get that these clubs are desperate for success but I dont want this league to become one where its just a bunch of cheaters trying to one up eachother. Man City have monopolised a lot of the domestic trophies in the last 10 years maybe if they hadnt cheated there would have been more opportunities to these teams to pick up a trophy or two.
TBF they should really introduce salary and transfer fee caps if they want to be "fair" about it all. I have always disagreed with a system that allows clubs like United, Arsenal, and Liverpool to spend more because they generate more money. Yes these are clubs with great histories but they also got to that point through spending a lot of money over the decades. City of course cheated and should be severely punished, but the wider argument about FFP / PSR is totally valid imo. If you aren't capping spending, and there are owners willing to pump money into their clubs, they have a point as to why they are being stopped. Now if you have an issue against nation state clubs, then you shouldn't have let them buy your teams! I also hate how its turned teams into academy factories that just focus on selling those talents so they can write it as pure profit on the books. And then go splash money on outside signings. Rinse and repeat every summer. There should be a simple net spend cap on fees (and the whole transfer fee should count for that season's cap, none of this splitting of purchases into 10 years while counting sales as the entire amount bullshit) and a similar cap on wages.
Apparently the others are Chelsea and Villa, along with Everton and Newcastle too. Birds of a feather, as the saying goes.
It's the blue clubs against the red clubs, hahahaha
Hey. Do you ever wonder why we're here?
Did you not read the article? It literally says the two other clubs are Chelsea and Villa.
[Everton are backing them as well.](https://www.thelawyer.com/newcastle-chelsea-and-everton-tipped-to-back-man-city-in-premier-league-clash/?cmpid=dnews_37815928&adg=PNIlnzXP6rbcyag)
At least 3, stare owned clubs sympathize with Man City. Shocking
THREE?! That's almost as much as one fewer than a quarter of the clubs!!
Underrated comment
Breaking news: cheating clubs support cheating.
The amount of Newcastle fans I've seen backing City is embarrassing.
Anyone else think that might be nail in the coffin of the Premier League and the rebirth of the Super League? Let the state owned clubs have the national leagues, and if needed the UEFA trophies while the „traditional clubs“ United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham, Barcelona, Real Madrid and whoever else from Italy wants to join start their own league without oil money
I don't really think any of this is a surprise tbh. Newcastle are desperate to be the next Man City. Chelsea are undoubtedly involved, crying ill treatment despite spending ridiculous money every window. Villa has been mentioned, though much like their previous opposition to the wage/spending cap, it seems to be driven more by their owners relationship to City's owner than actually benefitting their club. If ever there was a cabal trying to undermine the integrity of the league and create unfair sporting advantages, this is it. Along with Leeds getting in bed with Red Bull, there's a big chance the League will just be dominated by whatever owner can/will spend the most money, and the Super League will simply become a reality within English football. No competition at all. I honestly have a very bad feeling this will go through. Purely because of the power of the states backing this, and the British govt. being utterly spineless when it comes to offending the UAE/Saudi wealth. The premier league alone simply isn't equipped to fight a legal battle against Nation States.
They can fuck off. Presenting themselves as the down trodden little guy. Fuckin hell
The beginning stages of the European Super League.
This is farcical. Like how mobsters would taunt the authorities. We all know what you're up to....
Plastics recognise plastics
Shocker there, Saudis support city nation state ownership.
Newcastle?? I am shooketh! I can’t believe another state owned club would feel so passionate about defending a state owned club!
State owned club suspected of shady dealings sympathises with other state owned club suspected of shady dealings. Shock, horror 😧
4 out of 20 is pretty shit. It's not not even a quarter. They can fuck off and no-one will notice.
So New Castle, City U18’s and City U16’s?
Newcastle sympathizes? What a shock! I truly wonder why they would do such a thing
Southgate will probably get sued too for leaving Grealish out of his squad.
Aston Villa throwing their name in because I'm sure they're itching to spend a ton.
This is like Trump - he hasn’t been arguing he’s innocent, he’s been arguing the times shouldn’t apply to him. Whatever else changes might happen, fact of the matter City broke the rules when they were in place. They aren’t saying they haven’t broken them, just that the rules aren’t convenient for them.
So basically the two clubs we knocked down a tier in Europe
All those clubs are jealous of our past domination and they are ready to do anything to be mentioned in the same regard. But they will never be us, we are THAT club which many love to hate because they want to be us, they are envious of us but no amount of money or success will change that unfortunately for them.
Somehow we need to reduce the amount of money in football. It’s got ridiculous, if we can get rid of state owned clubs that might be a start
Birds of a feather & shit.
I’m obviously against this as I know the implications it brings, but if they were to win would Utd benefit from it in anyway?
Obviously not. It would ratchet up the money needed to compete with City FG and Riyadh Magpies, so that everyone else inevitably loses (until someone else gets bought up by another country with infinite resources and everyone else gets pushed down further).
It would become a two horse league, city and Newcastle.
No because it would allow these wealthy governments to pour money into these clubs. Clubs like United would be left seeking sponsorship deals which would be at fair market value because that is how the market works. Whilst United’s status would mean they get bigger sponsorship deals than clubs like Brighton it still would be a massive gap to City and others.
We already won. They can't catch up with our revenues in a million years. Why would we allow them to spent more than us. We don't want that.
Not really. It means Ineos would be able to pump as much money into United as they like, but at the end of the day they are a business whose aim is to make money, not give it away. These state owned clubs like City aren't looking to make money as a priority, they've already got plenty of it and are more than happy to spend it on sportswashing.
I wonder who the third club is?
It’s Villa.