One thing Ive not seen much mention of is that this investigation has only focussed on the 9 seasons up to and including 2017/18. Surely there has to be a "Part 2" in the pipeline to look at the next 8 seasons? Or are we to believe that they suddenly became compliant at that point? No fucking chance
Re: City again (sorry)
Posted by westy on October 1, 2026, 12:03 pm, in reply to "City again (sorry) "
There very much will be a part 2 and it will be much worse for them, not least as they've been refusing to hand over accounts for the later years apparently.
When they do get hold of them I imagine we'll see they've been emboldened by having got away with it for years earlier. And of course they'll then be repeat offenders. The punishments should be catastrophic for them. Clearly the attitude from the top is that they can do what the fuck they want, which is very much how they live their lives generally.
I'm surprised but impressed by the panel (and Masters) having properly gone for them, but they didn't have much choice given how they'd just been stonewalled and told to fuck off for years. The repeated (11 times?) use of the word "sham" tells its own story. They're fuming with them.
Cue £100 million fine and 2 year transfer ban which will have no material effect. They need completely destroying. I'm talking 5 leagues below League 2, whatever that is.
I have now read the 40 page executive summary, nothing else has been released. Two things stand out. Firstly not a single City witness was believed and all the bank statements etc were deemed to be falsified. Secondly the panel claim that city’s legitimate sponsorships only amounted to 16 million in 2016.
Re: City again (sorry)
Posted by betosneck on October 1, 2026, 11:48 am, in reply to "City again (sorry) "
It's just when they started the investigation. At that point there would have been a cut off saying we are just investigating to this point.
Otherwise that 115 charges would have been increasing on a monthly basis.
Re: City again (sorry)
Posted by TeddyBoy on October 1, 2026, 11:16 am, in reply to "City again (sorry) "
Despite me not being emotionally arsed by it all, somebody has already pointed out by that stage they were able to attract enough legitimate revenue to prevent the need to over inflate their numbers.
Unlikely really. Haaland for example bought in 2022. There are huge questions around the transfer price, wages, agent fees.
Re: City again (sorry)
Posted by Yogi_Clementine on October 1, 2026, 11:42 am, in reply to "Re: City again (sorry) "
Which, if true, kind of proves the point that it's impossible to get a leg-up over the metaphorical drawbridge they created to keep them at the top - as per the likes of Villa and Newcastle being kept down