The mancityfans.net football forum

Dameerto wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:Can't see that it's just a case of complying with the restrictions & we get the limit lifted. That would mean that if we spent more than 50 mil, the only penalty would have been to have the ban stay in place next season, so why not just ignore it ?

That would be a one year transfer limit not a two year one.

The second year is suspended if we get ourselves back within their revised regulations when we publish our figures. I'm pretty sure this was mentioned in the announcements somewhere. Where's Socrates when we need him?

Not seen that myself, but there is obviously more detail than I have seen.

What I read at the time said a €60 mil fine but 40million euros of the fine was suspended & would not be imposed if we reached break even. Plus the squad limit for one season and also a two year salary cap & transfer limit.

The bit in the actual UEFA document says this:

Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016.
Manchester City further accepts a calculated limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List
for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions.

This calculation is based on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by this agreement.

So there are details missing from that but clearly, the net transfer spend is significant in some kind of calculations.

So basically if we get Ian Nancho in the squad in October we will have four strikers and pretty much broken even thus saving ourselves shit loads in fine. So next year so long as we are sensible spending we will then have more in the pit for some fresh faces season after. Makes sense.

Let's hope Ian Nancho can do the biz!

ruralblue wrote:So basically if we get Ian Nancho in the squad in October we will have four strikers and pretty much broken even thus saving ourselves shit loads in fine. So next year so long as we are sensible spending we will then have more in the pit for some fresh faces season after. Makes sense.

Let's hope Ian Nancho can do the biz!

If that's the plan.

It's our plan on here, but of course it might not be Pellegrini's. I hope it is though.

Ted Hughes wrote:

ruralblue wrote:So basically if we get Ian Nancho in the squad in October we will have four strikers and pretty much broken even thus saving ourselves shit loads in fine. So next year so long as we are sensible spending we will then have more in the pit for some fresh faces season after. Makes sense.

Let's hope Ian Nancho can do the biz!

If that's the plan.

It's our plan on here, but of course it might not be Pellegrini's. I hope it is though.

Let's sell it to them Ted! Sounds plausible!

Lets hope a big stack of the cash is being put aside for Barkley next summer.

lets all have a disco wrote:Lets hope a big stack of the cash is being put aside for Barkley next summer.

Curiously... Could it be Jan? I cannot follow the Platini stitch up well enough to know the airquote rules.

Cheers

Pogba.

sheblue wrote:Pogba.

This is what I've heard, but in the summer.

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

sheblue wrote:Pogba.

This is what I've heard, but in the summer.

I hate pogbas look. Seriously. His look.he can fuck off.

Cheers

Ted Hughes wrote:

Dameerto wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:Can't see that it's just a case of complying with the restrictions & we get the limit lifted. That would mean that if we spent more than 50 mil, the only penalty would have been to have the ban stay in place next season, so why not just ignore it ?

That would be a one year transfer limit not a two year one.

The second year is suspended if we get ourselves back within their revised regulations when we publish our figures. I'm pretty sure this was mentioned in the announcements somewhere. Where's Socrates when we need him?

Not seen that myself, but there is obviously more detail than I have seen.

What I read at the time said a €60 mil fine but 40million euros of the fine was suspended & would not be imposed if we reached break even. Plus the squad limit for one season and also a two year salary cap & transfer limit.

The bit in the actual UEFA document says this:

Manchester City agrees to significantly limit spending in the transfer market for seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016.
Manchester City further accepts a calculated limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List
for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions.

This calculation is based on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by this agreement.

So there are details missing from that but clearly, the net transfer spend is significant in some kind of calculations.

The guy in your original post is making the same assumption that I made about transfer spending - the UEFA agreement actually says we can record a 20 mill euro loss or less in our next figures and we will get our squad limit returned to normal next season but it looks like the transfer spending restriction stays in place no matter what. (For some reason I thought they were tied together, and the club's statement makes no mention of next season's transfer limit)

Edit: there's a bullet point on page two actually, that mentions net transfer as being relevant to the number of players able to be registered on the 'A' list for UEFA competitions:
Manchester City further accepts a calculated limitation on the number of new registrations it may include within their “A” List for the purposes of participation in UEFA competitions. This calculation is based on the clubs net transfer position in each respective registration period covered by this agreement.

Khaldoon said that sometimes you have to take a pinch. Maybe this was it. We still strengthened where we needed to and, Negredo aside, I think all the sales were planned. Negredo seems to have been player led, possibly down to his family and what we got for him was fantastic taking that into account.

Not getting a replacement may backfire on our chances of winning the league if we get an injury, but perhaps that's the pinch. However, next season, UEFA has gone away, revenues will be up again, the stadium will be expanded, Melbourne and New York will be in full flight and we move forwards again.

This was always a ten year plan and six years in we have two league titles, an FA Cup, a league Cup, an FA cup final, two league cup semi finals, a second and a third place finish. I don't see we're going away

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

sheblue wrote:Pogba.

This is what I've heard, but in the summer.

Hmm. An exciting idea as I think he will be a big big player for years to come.
finding the right young midfield engine (like Lampard for Chelsea, Gerrard for pool, the former cunts at rags etc) is worth all the money in the world. Whether that's Pogba or Barkley or someone else that's up to spafia to decide but Pogba would tick a lot of boxes

The fact that Whiskey let him go would tick another box too . . .

Moonchesteri wrote:

Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:

sheblue wrote:Pogba.

This is what I've heard, but in the summer.

Hmm. An exciting idea as I think he will be a big big player for years to come.
finding the right young midfield engine (like Lampard for Chelsea, Gerrard for pool, the former cunts at rags etc) is worth all the money in the world. Whether that's Pogba or Barkley or someone else that's up to spafia to decide but Pogba would tick a lot of boxes

PaddyV when sat doing a recent interview for mcfctv was asked which youngster was most like him and excited him (or words to that effect) and he picked out pogba straight away and not fofana

Presumably it's equally important to look at the impact on the wage bill of all the comings and goings plus contract extensions. It seems that Soriano has done a good job here too. With off field income growing rapidly we'll be generating large profits very soon and we can wave two fingers at UEFA. There again if the investment in youth starts to pay off we may not need to spend big in transfer windows in years to come.

blues2win wrote:Presumably it's equally important to look at the impact on the wage bill of all the comings and goings plus contract extensions. It seems that Soriano has done a good job here too. With off field income growing rapidly we'll be generating large profits very soon and we can wave two fingers at UEFA. There again if the investment in youth starts to pay off we may not need to spend big in transfer windows in years to come.

Our transfer spending has been astronomical in the last 6 years. This latest window is a massive turnaround when you consider we keep halving our debts despite our bih outlays. The books will be well and truly balanced in our favour, especially with all the new tom glick deals that keep rolling in. The only problem we will have is pisstaini will see this as HIS and his FFP rules that caused the success and hail it as their achievement.

Not seen this alleged removal of sanctions mentioned in any other pieces, just the one I quoted which I'm can't remember where it came from. But they obviously got the details from somewhere & it doesn't seem like a bullshitty kind of article, so let's hope they have it right.

I can't find a definitive UEFA explanation as to what they mean with some of the stuff from their judgement which I've quoted on here. There doesn't seem to be a public release of the full details anywhere. They know, & City know, what it means but neither have told us exactly how it works.

Probably wanted to keep it quiet away from Wenger's big fucking nose.

I don't think it's been really hidden Ted as we were well aware of the restrictions and timeframes. My understanding was always us keeping a lid on it this season and we'd be clear the next.

Obviously a nice ploy as this is the season when they've all spent big, giving them a free rein to pull in their suitors without outside pressure. Us and PSG being out of the race meant they could carve up all the best players going and in the Rags case, pay heavily for it.

i really don't think our summer would have gone too differently without the restrictions to be honest

Beefymcfc wrote:I don't think it's been really hidden Ted as we were well aware of the restrictions and timeframes. My understanding was always us keeping a lid on it this season and we'd be clear the next.

Obviously a nice ploy as this is the season when they've all spent big, giving them a free rein to pull in their suitors without outside pressure. Us and PSG being out of the race meant they could carve up all the best players going and in the Rags case, pay heavily for it.

Well I didn't know, & still don't.