08 Oct 2026 20:34:20
I think this Man City whole thing needs sorting with a proper and fair outcome. This is my take and just an opinion but would like to know what ED01 thinks as well as my fellow posters. When the Putin envasion of Ukraine happened Roman was forced out. We were sanctioned with devasting effects that the club are still feeling. I think the UK government and Andy Burnham are pampering City.
This is no longer only about a football club. It is about who is protected, and who is not. American owners. Russian owners. Arab owners. Are they treated the same? No.
When Roman was stripped of the club, the line from the FA was that the integrity of the game sits above the interest of any foreign national. That line has changed. This is now interest, and ties.
A supporter of City, dressed up as a fair statement, has arrived from Andy Burnham. That is not his job. Sport has a ministry. Let it work. A political office telling the game how a case should land is not neutral, and it is not small.
The message underneath is obvious. Do not push this club. Do not talk about a sale. We prefer these owners to stay. That is not fair. It is dangerous.
You do not want to lose the partner. Or you want to bend the competition. I do not know which. What I know is that money is now the subject.
A Russian owner was forced to sell and leave, with no FA charge and no Premier League sustainability breach in front of him. City sit on 115. They are being managed, appealed, and spoken for. Burnham backing the ownership is disappointing.
Roman put billions into Chelsea and turned it into a European powerhouse. He was shown the door. City broke the competition. A man convicted, still calling himself innocent because the paperwork was not perfect. That is this case.
The rules that protect every member club should be allowed to run when there is a defaulter. Or some clubs get a privilege. I do not think that is fair.
The delay, the appeals, the political comment — they are all on the table. In my book, City cheated. The outcome will say whether the game still has rules, or only friends.
ED01, am I bonkers or do I have a fair point?
{Ed001's Note - I think you do have a fair point. City cheated, why on earth is anyone coming out to defend their ownership? They were responsible, so they have to accept the consequences. To have politics interfere in this way is against FIFA regulations and they are quick to close down FAs when it happens in Africa, and condemn this kind of thing there, why is nothing being said here? Sport cannot be totally free of politics, it is impossible, but the leadership should not be pressured by politicians to make sporting decisions based on who is investing in the country.}
09 Oct 2026 08:31:41
Thankyou for your reply ED01, I'm hoping the UK Government are told to stay out of it by FIFA.
{Ed001's Note - the annoying thing is, they shouldn't need telling, they are one of the first to jump in to criticise others for meddling.}
09 Oct 2026 08:47:09
One word, money and don't think for one moment FIFA won't back City, they also have too many fingers in the Middle East pie.
And don't get me started on Newcastle and them not being owned by the Saudi government after what they admitted with LIV golf. Was their ownership question revisited, not a chance in he'll of thar happening.
Where is Chris Bryant the Labour bod who constantly hammered Roman, when you need him.
09 Oct 2026 08:48:53
Exactly right ED01, it appears to me that this is all about money and I suspect the UK Government is now under pressure from the Abu Dhabi owners who no doubt have bought up a lot of the area in manchester. If they get away with this it will ruin competitive football in the Premier League in my opinion and they must be stopped.
09 Oct 2026 15:30:19
I just put it down to a stupid comment from our PM. I have no doubt that Sham City's owners will be trying to get favours from so called friends.
If it ever came out that a uk football governing body bent the knee under pressure from the government in my opinion the problems for that government would be significant.
I personally cannot see how the regulator makes all fans happy with any punishment they dish out.
I would be happy with a 50/60 points deduction for multi seasons plus a substantial fine.
Any revolving points deduction would almost certainly mean that a European ban would be redundant.
Other fans may well want Sham City drummed out of the League, all titles taken away from them, substantial fine, European ban and the owners told to sell up. This would then be followed by multiple clubs claiming compensation.
If the punishment is to lenient then fans will say it's about money or unfair government pressure. So, I think any punishment will be tough but whatever it is, I doubt us fans will be happy.
09 Oct 2026 17:27:16
Tom
Im getting used to stupid comments from our unelected PM.
Firstly if they are deducted so many points each season then tgat will affect the television ratings as their games will be non events.
I personally would like them stripped of all titles but not give the runners up rhe glory. History books would show blank spaces where the winners should be and it would be a reminder for future generations than cheats won't prosper.
I would also like them go have a 10 year transfer ban on purchases. Also I would like to see no no ticket sales for their fans, no sales allowed from their shop merchandise and also they can only spend so much on player travel.
One thing is for sure whatever happens, it won't please football fans of other clubs.
Im still waiting for Chris Bryant, the labour minster for NI, to come out and slaughter the Cheaty owners the way he slaughtered RA and the CFC fans who could not attend games.
09 Oct 2026 21:31:29
Bill, we are in agreement that virtually no fans will be happy with any punishment.
I'm ok with an asterisk by their name on any cups they have won but do understand the teams who were denied glory wanting more.
Bill, if they had 50/60 points deducted for say five seasons they would be relegated and not come back to the premiership for 5/6 seasons. Any TV revenues wouldn't matter and neither would a European ban.
There was a rumour that most professional footballers have a so called "trust clause" inserted in their contracts. My guess is that if this is the case it is inserted to protect clubs. If true it would be interesting to see if players could say the club had breached its duty of trust and therefore leave on a free transfer.