Chelsea and Man City. 21st century football dopers and cheaters.
With Everton getting a 10 point deduction for one offence. Personally I think it should have been a lot more. What will both Chelsea and City get for far more serious offences? Relegation seems an almost certainty now to the two biggest cheating clubs of the 21st century.
Authorities just need to get on with it now. Stop protecting these two clubs. Everton wronged a long time after both of these clubs, and have been punished. Time to now sort out City and Chelsea.
No punishment can be to big for City with their 115 breaches of the rules. Rangers were demoted to the very bottom of the Scottish pyramid for far less. So City`s punishment should be the harshest ever handed out in British football.
Chelsea are serial cheats, having already been fined for cooking the books, they are now under investigation again, and they need to be punished with relegation a minimum, and probably down three or four rungs. I was astonished that the club was sold so quickly without any scrutiny of the Abramovich era, and his dodgy financial deals with the Russian state. Obviously a few backhanders in place somewhere along the line.
Time to clean up football once and for all, and get the two most corrupt, financial doped clubs out of the equation once and for all. The clock is ticking on both clubs. Authorities need to do the right thing now that they have made an example of Everton.
Surely the game is now up for both
posted on 18/11/23
comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by kloppites (U13373)
posted 10 minutes ago
Spurs owner too Joe Lewiis corrupt as feck
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He may be corrupt but the club isn't unlike Chelsea and City where the money was used to win title and trophies. Joe Lewis used inside knowledge to make a few bucks, and I am sure FSG are full of "noble" steed like that who look immaculate but are as thieving as anyone else. That's how they all make money. This has though nothing to do with the club.
This kind of inside dealings is rife in US so FSG are probably in it too
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There won’t be a single pl club that isn’t corrupt. Very naive to think otherwise
posted on 18/11/23
Regardless of whom is doing the investigation we all know that Cuty and Chelsea will get away with it , cash in brown envelopes has a funny way of changing peoples minds.
posted on 18/11/23
comment by Striketeam7 - There used to be a football club over there (U18109)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 49 minutes ago
comment by (K̇ash) - Liverpool 7-0 Man U - Free Palestin... (U1108)
posted 1 minute ago
Since Fergie retired only 2 teams have won the PL and that is Leicester and Liverpool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don`t often agree with you, but I make you right. I personally do not recognise any of Chelsea or City`s trophies in the 21st century under their corrupt owners.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liverpools has a massive asterisk next to it as well though - they changed the rules half way through the season - that was never a legit season and it should have been cancelled. The only reason they didn’t cancel it was because of the Klopp moan - people just couldn’t deal with the Khunt whining on so they were given an asterisk title.
Well done Leicester
----------------------------------------------------------------------
taking bitterness and hate to a whole new level.
60 plus years and counting 😂
posted on 18/11/23
comment by Edward Elizabeth Hitler. (U14393)
posted 2 hours, 9 minutes ago
Regardless of whom is doing the investigation we all know that Cuty and Chelsea will get away with it , cash in brown envelopes has a funny way of changing peoples minds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's Cuty got to do with this?
posted on 18/11/23
comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
? what accusations?
The city case is totally different from the Cfc case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think some aspects are different while some are similar.
Payment of £1.7m to Mancini by Al Jazira for consultancy services before he joined City - Different
Payment of £15m per year sponsorship deal by Etisalat- similar
Image rights paid to players- similar.
The challenge for the PL is to prove that Mancini was paid that money on behalf of City especially given that he was paid before he signed with City.
Second is how to prove that the £30m Etisalat was disguised equity funding. If the telecom company provides proof of payment, how would the PL disregard that?
On the image rights stuff, every single player has come out to say there were no off the books payments. The PL would have to provide proof of this as well.
In a nutshell, City are very relaxed. Unless the panel wants to punish City without any evidence then that would open up another can of worms.
posted on 19/11/23
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 10 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
? what accusations?
The city case is totally different from the Cfc case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think some aspects are different while some are similar.
Payment of £1.7m to Mancini by Al Jazira for consultancy services before he joined City - Different
Payment of £15m per year sponsorship deal by Etisalat- similar
Image rights paid to players- similar.
The challenge for the PL is to prove that Mancini was paid that money on behalf of City especially given that he was paid before he signed with City.
Second is how to prove that the £30m Etisalat was disguised equity funding. If the telecom company provides proof of payment, how would the PL disregard that?
On the image rights stuff, every single player has come out to say there were no off the books payments. The PL would have to provide proof of this as well.
In a nutshell, City are very relaxed. Unless the panel wants to punish City without any evidence then that would open up another can of worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
115 charges and no evidence!!!! Are you really that stupid to think they would be bringing all those charges without a shred of evidence. I suspect they have a mountain of evidence. Just taking a while to compile it all.
City are in about as serious trouble as it gets.
posted on 19/11/23
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 10 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
? what accusations?
The city case is totally different from the Cfc case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think some aspects are different while some are similar.
Payment of £1.7m to Mancini by Al Jazira for consultancy services before he joined City - Different
Payment of £15m per year sponsorship deal by Etisalat- similar
Image rights paid to players- similar.
The challenge for the PL is to prove that Mancini was paid that money on behalf of City especially given that he was paid before he signed with City.
Second is how to prove that the £30m Etisalat was disguised equity funding. If the telecom company provides proof of payment, how would the PL disregard that?
On the image rights stuff, every single player has come out to say there were no off the books payments. The PL would have to provide proof of this as well.
In a nutshell, City are very relaxed. Unless the panel wants to punish City without any evidence then that would open up another can of worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
115 charges and no evidence!!!! Are you really that stupid to think they would be bringing all those charges without a shred of evidence. I suspect they have a mountain of evidence. Just taking a while to compile it all.
City are in about as serious trouble as it gets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The non cooperation charges alone is more than thirty.
The 115 consists of mainly five different offences multiplied by a number of years.
Take out non cooperation for example, that’s 30 gone.
Take out the Mancini contract and that’s another 20 gone etc.
Maybe you should take time to understand the case against us before getting excited.
If Etisalat case is resolved, that automatically takes out more than 50 of the charges.
We are fine if the rule of law is applied.
posted on 19/11/23
Also, the amount involved in City’s investigation is very small. It’s not like we’re talking about hundreds of millions. The PL had the opportunity to let go but decided to go nuclear.
Mancini payment made by Al Jazira - £1.7m
Etisalat deal was £15m x 2 (£30m)
Yaya Toure’s agent- undisclosed
Question: Do you think these amounts were the reason City are performing very well on the pitch?
Do you want to strip the PL won between 2018 to 2023 for an offence committed in 2010?
Is this what you call financial doping?
I’m putting these out there because so many rival fans have no clue about the charges. Instead, they think City broke 115 different rules.
We will be fine.
Our man fears are the non cooperation charges which requires no evidence. This could lead to massive fines and nothing more.
posted on 19/11/23
When will they be charging referees with gross incompetence, ineptitude, bias and bottling decisions against certain clubs. All this distorts the league table just as much as any financial irregularities.
posted on 19/11/23
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 3 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 10 hours, 48 minutes ago
comment by ifarka, (B-C- out) (U8182)
posted 9 hours, 54 minutes ago
? what accusations?
The city case is totally different from the Cfc case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think some aspects are different while some are similar.
Payment of £1.7m to Mancini by Al Jazira for consultancy services before he joined City - Different
Payment of £15m per year sponsorship deal by Etisalat- similar
Image rights paid to players- similar.
The challenge for the PL is to prove that Mancini was paid that money on behalf of City especially given that he was paid before he signed with City.
Second is how to prove that the £30m Etisalat was disguised equity funding. If the telecom company provides proof of payment, how would the PL disregard that?
On the image rights stuff, every single player has come out to say there were no off the books payments. The PL would have to provide proof of this as well.
In a nutshell, City are very relaxed. Unless the panel wants to punish City without any evidence then that would open up another can of worms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
115 charges and no evidence!!!! Are you really that stupid to think they would be bringing all those charges without a shred of evidence. I suspect they have a mountain of evidence. Just taking a while to compile it all.
City are in about as serious trouble as it gets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The non cooperation charges alone is more than thirty.
The 115 consists of mainly five different offences multiplied by a number of years.
Take out non cooperation for example, that’s 30 gone.
Take out the Mancini contract and that’s another 20 gone etc.
Maybe you should take time to understand the case against us before getting excited.
If Etisalat case is resolved, that automatically takes out more than 50 of the charges.
We are fine if the rule of law is applied.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have taken out 50. That still leaves 65. Given that Everton got 10 points for ONE, then City are about as deep in it as it gets.
Enjoy Conference footie.