Win a copy of FM24 in our Prediction League. Prizes are given out to the best predictor each month, so you have multiple chances to win.
sortitoutsi
Football Manager Graphics
- FM24 Graphics
- FM24 Player Faces
- FM24 Logos
- FM24 Kits
- FM24 Backgrounds
- FM24 Installation Instructions
Football Manager Guides Database
Football Manager Data Update
Football Manager Shortlists
- FM24 Guides
- FM24 Shortlists
- Best FM24 Wonderkids
- Cheap FM24 Wonderkids
- FM24 Young Players aged 21-25
- FM24 Best Free Players
- FM24 Expiring Contracts
- FM24 Bargain Players
- FM24 Injury Prone Players
- FM24 Richest Clubs
- Best FM24 Facilities
- FM23 Guides
- FM23 Shortlists
- Best FM23 Wonderkids
- Cheap FM23 Wonderkids
- FM23 Young Players aged 21-25
- FM23 Best Free Players
- FM23 Expiring Contracts
- FM23 Bargain Players
- FM23 Injury Prone Players
- FM23 Richest Clubs
- Best FM23 Facilities
This site is not endorsed by Sports Interactive or SEGA and is intended for entertainment purposes only. The views expressed on this site are the views of the individual contributors and not those of Sports Interactive or SEGA.
Based Jorge
The only team that could be proper fucked is PSG because they're owner simply doesn't give a fuck.
bluemoon.
I'm not against financial reforms; they are needed but they shouldn't be designed to safeguard the big clubs the way FFP is, and there should probably be some provision for the clubs with hundreds of millions in debt hanging over their heads.
Slashman X
Confirming restructured contracts:
Slashman X
Supposed to be replica pitches (dimensions + camber of surface) of different teams in the league as well as a "lab" which allows training in different climates/environments etc. Very impressive
Based Jorge
Slashman X
Majority of the workforce and materials were sourced locally too
Slashman X
Slashman X
bluemoon.
Slashman X
.verse
DB
Go on?
Slashman X
Frank has released a "statement" anyway:
Using the word "commitment" makes it seem like he signed a pre-contract or something
.verse
Well when Lampard originally left Chelsea the reports were that he signed for New York. He then was meant to move to Melbourne City on loan except there was a rule change that came into place for this season in which loan players wages counted towards teams salary caps, so this meant no Lampard move there and eventually ending with him at Man City. Again, that's entirely fine. The move was listed as loan until the end of the year, in which he'd then head to NYCFC at the start of Jan. Then this whole extension has taken place. Which is where it makes things interesting because Lampard featured in a game that took place on Jan 1st, where no extension would have been possible to have been arranged for his deal that technically would have already ended. Now, the talk seems to suggest that he signed a 1 year deal with Man City, despite initially being revealed as signing for NYCFC on a 2 year deal and being used to promote all their media commitments and help sell season tickets. NYCFC then had to change this and use David Villa, which saw him being prematurely recalled from his Melbourne City guest stint loan after only playing in 4 of his possible 10 games.
Something doesn't add up because even during all Lampard's interviews it was said to be a loan move. Now all that's been backtracked upon and has even been removed from some sources that had it listed.
Sam
And this makes me laugh:
Number 1
Sam
All of this is dodgy as hell. How did City loan him for New York if they never bought him? Ridiculous.
.verse
It's all too flakey.
bluemoon.
If the latest round of reports are actually right then we didn't. He only signed an agreement to sign for NYCFC rather than actually signing for them, then we signed him on a 1-year contract, (the shortest length allowed) with a break clause on the 31st December so he could leave and join NYCFC. This break clause wasn't triggered because he was doing so well.
Frankly the more I read about this, the more I think this is an example of staggering incompetence on City's part as opposed to dodgy dealings.
Chera
Sure Wenger called this right back in August.
bluemoon.
Wenger claimed it was an FFP dodge. That's so vague it's virtually meaningless.
DB
It does seem there a bit of dodyness going on though.
Owning three clubs and 'loaning' players between them, especially when two of those leagues have a salary cap and the other involved with FFP, is going to raise some eyebrows.
Chera
But thats essentially what it is?
bluemoon.
True but there's a difference between seeming dodgy and actually being dodgy. I can see how it could be - i.e. if NYCFC were paying a players wages during a loan to City - but that doesn't seem to have happened, people just seem to be going to the reflex reaction of it seems dodgy, therefore it is. Everybody was up in arms about the Etihad deal and that was perfectly legitimate despite all the claims along the lines of "it's clearly dodgy".
How is it though? What do you think they're actually doing that is against the rules?
DB
The Villa deal was the bigger eyebrow raiser for me. I mean he only ended playing 4 games for Melbourne were he was classed as being in a guest stint which doesn't affect the cap. Then the reports came out that his wage at NYCFC was around 60k. So it seems like there has been some front loading of his contract while he was at Melbourne.
As long as it isn't illegal I am not even that bothered about the City group exploiting the situation they have tbh. Wouldn't be surprised to see some rule changes come in over the next few years though when it comes to players being traded between clubs owned by the same people.
bluemoon.
To be honest, I didn't follow the Villa saga all that closely 'cos he didn't really have any bearing to City. I was under the impression he joined Melbourne as a guest player and just left early so any controversy over that has kind of passed me by.
Agree on the prospect of rule changes though. I can't imagine we'll be the only club to set-up networks like this.
Chera
Could City not basically have Lampard without paying his wages? Rather than declare his wages on their wageroll to the FFP they could say that they have loaned him from New York who will pay all his wages for the duration of the loan.
bluemoon.
That is possible but City have said they're paying his wages. Realistically if they're trying to cheat FFP it'd be a good idea to come up with something slightly less transparent than that.
Ninja
bluemoon.
Exactly. This is why it's been annoying me.