Manchester City Thread

you mean džeko, not dzecko :P

but that doesn't approve descision to let negredo go, too risky with all injury woes for both aguero and jovetić.
 
It is a risk but we did pretty much play with only 3 strikers last season as Jovetic only played 350 minutes of PL football.

If Aguero and Jovetic start gettting injuries again we have the option of pushing Yaya into the AM or playing Silva there with Navas coming in.

Hopefully Iheanacho is given the responsibility when he gets his work permit in Oct. Got a feeling he will be a star.

Other than that we have 30m to spend if we identify a target in Jan
 
?
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...llow-city-to-dodge-ffp-sanctions-9725033.html

“Uefa have effectively rewritten their home grown player rule,” said Daniel Geey, the football law specialist at the firm Field Fisher Waterhouse, who has advised clients and written extensively on FFP. “There is nothing in Uefa or FFP regulations about the home-grown rule changing.”

Fifpro could not be contacted, though Uefa did confirm that the watering down of the most damaging part of City’s FFP punishment followed consultation with “concerned stakeholders”.
 
Was just about to post that Ryan.

And so it begins....

Although I have always found the homegrown rule to be odd in relation to EU regulations. Instead they should just place more financial penalties on clubs and point deductions for group stages.
 
There's nothing in the rules that a downsized squad had to have 8 HG players either. Old news anyway. What's Herbert the Red been up to for the past 3 months? The press made ill informed assumptions that turned out incorrect. Nothing new there either.

Also, for someone who has written 'extensively' on the subject, Geev doesn't understand FFP. I had a discussion with him on twitter and he thought that the FFP net spend limits were based on amortization. He was saying that PSG could sign 5 50m players on 5 year contracts this summer. Pure nonsense, of course, but he wouldn't listen
 
Last edited:
One thing I didn't realise on FFP (apparently) is that when you sign your own player to a new contract, it negates the transfer fee apparently. Think it was on FW they discussed that could be part of the reason that City resigned what, 6 senior players to new longer term deals?

All anyone really understands about FFP is that it's flawed and when clubs break it, they won't really be punished as promised.
 
Contract extensions mean the transfer fee gets stretched further across the extra years.

eg.
A 50m player who originally signs on a 5 year deal would cost 10m (+wages) a year on the accounts. If after a few years he signs a 5 year extension on top of that the fee would go down to around 5m (+wages) a year.
I don't think it's a FFP thing. It's just how accounting works.
 
yep. transfer fees are subject to amortization, so for every year the player remains at your club, u get to write off a depreciation charge from your books. i'm not really sure how amortization rates could effect FFP-related calculations though..... some sort of a retroactive bonus perhaps?

then again, i don't really know anything about how FFP works (and i honestly don't care much about it either).:P
 
Last edited:
Godotelli said:
Contract extensions mean the transfer fee gets stretched further across the extra years.

eg.
A 50m player who originally signs on a 5 year deal would cost 10m (+wages) a year on the accounts. If after a few years he signs a 5 year extension on top of that the fee would go down to around 5m (+wages) a year.
I don't think it's a FFP thing. It's just how accounting works.
Click to expand...

Got it, that makes some sense. They must restate amortization expenses then each year for FFP, if it's included at all. As with Lo Zio, don't really care about intricacies, but probably should be somewhat cash flow based.
 
Godotelli said:
There's nothing in the rules that a downsized squad had to have 8 HG players either. Old news anyway. What's Herbert the Red been up to for the past 3 months? The press made ill informed assumptions that turned out incorrect. Nothing new there either.

Also, for someone who has written 'extensively' on the subject, Geev doesn't understand FFP. I had a discussion with him on twitter and he thought that the FFP net spend limits were based on amortization. He was saying that PSG could sign 5 50m players on 5 year contracts this summer. Pure nonsense, of course, but he wouldn't listen
Click to expand...
Aren't they based on amortizations ? I read some of those articles you are talking about and I would be surprised if he is wrong.
 
Yep, amortization can just be seen as business costs. So they are also part of a clubs expenditure.

So in the example of City, lets say the players in question cost 100mil in total transfer fees based on a 5 year contracts. That means those transfers were costing the club 20mil per year. Now they are costing 8mil per year (if they have all signed for another 5 years). Im not sure how it works with years already "paid" though, whether they can retroactively re calculate or whether the remaining cost are spread across the new contracts.

( so if they signed at the beginning of year 4 it would mean there is 40mil left in costs ( 3 years at 20mil per year = 60mil has been paid)) Which would mean 5 years for 40mil means the 20mil per year has dropped to 8mil per year.
 
Last edited:
Liverbird said:
Aren't they based on amortizations ? I read some of those articles you are talking about and I would be surprised if he is wrong.
Click to expand...

FFP in general is, yes. but the 50m net spending limit isn't


In other news, Fernando is going to miss the Arsenal, Bayern and Chelsea games. This is great considering these were the games he was bought for...

Hope Lampard is ready
 
Last edited:
Godotelli said:
This is a fucking disgusting performance by the officials. One of the most onesided performances I've seen for quite some time.
Click to expand...

I've not seen anything wrong?

Your team are making cynical challenges all over the pitch, if anything you should have more yellow cards.
 
The amount of fouls we didn't get was unbelievable, incl. one for Arsenal's 1st goal. The less said about the pen 5 yards from the linesman the better

Didn't deserve to drop points today.
 
I thought the ref was strong, your gameplan was to barge,foul, push obstruct us to break up play whenever we came away with the ball, the ref showed from the beginning by giving out yellows that wasnt goin to work.

Many other refs would have left you to do it and you may have won the game because of it.

I thought the draw was a fair result myself.
 
Irrelevant. He wasn't giving us the fouls he was giving you.

It's Clattenberg tho. He fucked us at Anfield and he clearly wasn't going to give us anything today. He managed to give them the win that day but thankfully Demichelis popped up today.
 
Bobby, City should have had a penalty, Wilshere made hands inside the box and it was crystal clear that it was a deliberate hands...but i agree with you that it was a fair result.
 
Thought Clattenberg did okay, given City's gameplan. If he didn't book them, they'd of just continued to foul Arsenal players every time they could. That was the 'toughest' I've seen City in years.

Fernadinho in particular seemed content to 'leave a bit in' every time he was close to Arsenal player. It's one thing to 'rough em up a bit' as that tends to work against Arsenal, but the ref has to start booking players when it's that blatant and systematic.
 
A bitter Godo is a funny Godo. No opinion on the actual reffing tho, only saw the last ten minutes which was drool worthy fun to watch. Some real unlucky stuff from City towards the end.
 
beachryan said:
Thought Clattenberg did okay, given City's gameplan. If he didn't book them, they'd of just continued to foul Arsenal players every time they could. That was the 'toughest' I've seen City in years.

Fernadinho in particular seemed content to 'leave a bit in' every time he was close to Arsenal player. It's one thing to 'rough em up a bit' as that tends to work against Arsenal, but the ref has to start booking players when it's that blatant and systematic.
Click to expand...

I'm not bothered about that. He did a good job spotting the fouls we gave away.
 
beachryan said:
Thought Clattenberg did okay, given City's gameplan. If he didn't book them, they'd of just continued to foul Arsenal players every time they could. That was the 'toughest' I've seen City in years.

Fernadinho in particular seemed content to 'leave a bit in' every time he was close to Arsenal player. It's one thing to 'rough em up a bit' as that tends to work against Arsenal, but the ref has to start booking players when it's that blatant and systematic.
Click to expand...
They did the same against us. City are great at that and Liverpool should start copying it when you have referees that allows it.
 
Godotelli said:
I'm not bothered about that. He did a good job spotting the fouls we gave away.
Click to expand...

I love your avatar ! When ,a ref is surrounded by foreign players and ranting their broken English, that must be awful for them to administer .

I`ll keep an eye on Gooner-Mark :P ! We can blame Chels for accusing him ,while Arsene Wenger came to his defensive on more then one occasion publicly. To Have the longest serving Boss should count for something :BOP: penalties are never black/white (Jack did hand ball) but he put Nasri on his arse and GoonerMark laughed . Pelligrini speaking out will get fine or the refs will put him on the shit list for calls.
 
SitecoreImage


FFS Pellers. 2 Strikers = we lose
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom