Ronaldo (R9): "I think I love tennis more now than football. I cannot watch football matches. I think it's too boring." "I can stay for 5 hours watching tennis
I do find that football has become less interesting over the years and people generally turn their attention away during a game now.
Have the likes of Mourinho and Guardiola ruined football with their possession based and obsessesion woth tactical set ups?
Or is it down to decline in quality, technology, money or American ownership?
Does anyone else feel the sport has become boring to watch?
I remeber football back in the early 2000's
We'd be spoilt with world class players from every league and nation. It was total football.
The top teams in each league were giants and provided some great entertaining games.
- Wenger’s all football vs Fergie’s attack
- The galacticos
-The likes of AC Milan, Juve and even Roma and Inter
- The great national teams with the likes of Italy, Brazil, France, Holland, Portugal etc.. all had sublime players.
Back then there would be a long list of quality and deserving players going for the Balon D'or....Nowadays it's the likes of Vinicius, Rodrygo, Mpabbe, Bellingham
Has the quality in players declined over the years and has football declined as a sport?
Watching these Euros is becoming less interesting each game. It's been incredibly dull to watch - defending champions Italy (once a great team) have just been knocked out by Switzerland.
I remeber wingers were able to take on a player 1v1 and beat them, now they need a full back to make an overlapping run to beat a player and every Goalkeeper must be good on the ball.
Interested in people opinions on how they currently feel towards the sport and what direction to you think it's heading?
Or do you feel the sport has gotten better and the players are of better quality?
Has football become boring?
posted on 30/6/24
There are declared fees by City and according to Pinto a lot of unknown payments. Pep's brother is a part owner of football club with City. It all stinks to high heaven.
posted on 30/6/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
posted on 30/6/24
Really? Man City revenue is over £700m. How much is their brand worth? What would it have been if they had not cheated. That all impacts PSR and FFP!
posted on 30/6/24
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes it would but that's not what I'm saying. They would already have cheated and already are reaping the benefits.
What I'm saying is if they hadn't cheated, they would have found it more difficult to get where they got to and therefore it may not have been good for them currently. Obviously with FFP if you are already there, it benefits you as other clubs find it difficult to catch up.
posted on 30/6/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes it would but that's not what I'm saying. They would already have cheated and already are reaping the benefits.
What I'm saying is if they hadn't cheated, they would have found it more difficult to get where they got to and therefore it may not have been good for them currently. Obviously with FFP if you are already there, it benefits you as other clubs find it difficult to catch up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know and I’m disagreeing with you. I don’t think any of the allegations would have benefitted city enough to have impacted ffp.
posted on 30/6/24
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes it would but that's not what I'm saying. They would already have cheated and already are reaping the benefits.
What I'm saying is if they hadn't cheated, they would have found it more difficult to get where they got to and therefore it may not have been good for them currently. Obviously with FFP if you are already there, it benefits you as other clubs find it difficult to catch up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know and I’m disagreeing with you. I don’t think any of the allegations would have benefitted city enough to have impacted ffp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In that case I would ask why they did it then?
posted on 30/6/24
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes it would but that's not what I'm saying. They would already have cheated and already are reaping the benefits.
What I'm saying is if they hadn't cheated, they would have found it more difficult to get where they got to and therefore it may not have been good for them currently. Obviously with FFP if you are already there, it benefits you as other clubs find it difficult to catch up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know and I’m disagreeing with you. I don’t think any of the allegations would have benefitted city enough to have impacted ffp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In that case I would ask why they did it then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well they said they didn’t! What one are you talking about specifically?
posted on 30/6/24
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 48 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by TheresOnlyOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 25 minutes ago
Going full circle to Jimmy Hill.
Its illegal. That's the issue with price caps. FFP/PSR at least legal. Man City even want to break that to instil chaos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? No they don’t, they’re challenging the rules around associated party transactions, they’re not challenging FFP or PSR. They’re both good things for City.
If the APT rules are legal then they’ll stay in place. If they’re not then they’ll be rightly changed to ones that are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
One could argue that they're only good things NOW, after allegedly cheating to get where they are. Had they not 'cheated' they wouldn't be good things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not quite, it would have been a good thing now regardless of whether they are guilty of the allegations or not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes it would but that's not what I'm saying. They would already have cheated and already are reaping the benefits.
What I'm saying is if they hadn't cheated, they would have found it more difficult to get where they got to and therefore it may not have been good for them currently. Obviously with FFP if you are already there, it benefits you as other clubs find it difficult to catch up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know and I’m disagreeing with you. I don’t think any of the allegations would have benefitted city enough to have impacted ffp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In that case I would ask why they did it then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well they said they didn’t! What one are you talking about specifically?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but if we hypothetically assume they did, why?
I'm not talking specifically but to narrow it down(again lets assume theyre guilty):-
1. Why did they provide inaccurate financial records?
2. Why did they provide inaccurate details for player and manager payments?
3. Why did they not cooperate with the investigation?
Surely the whole point of one and two is to get around FFP rules?
Surely the whole point of three is to attempt to conceal this?
posted on 30/6/24
Well the main allegation that would have had a material impact on revenue is the disguised equity via Etihad. If they did that then the main benefit would be to Etihad themselves, there’d have been no logical reason for them to do it for City’s benefit given the contract.
On the player and manager payments, the player ones are linked to image rights and United did a similar thing (and are under investigation by HMRC about it). There’s a benefit to the individuals and I don’t think the amount being talked about is enough for it to have materially influenced ffp.
posted on 30/6/24
Cash availability I suppose could be one with the Etihad one too.