Yeah, he made a few good passes (including his contribution for the first goal) but that definitely wasn't one of his better games, he didn't look that sharp. Yaya was fairly subdued too.

#164125 Transfer Rumours 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

07 May 2014 23:52:11

By Telegram Sam | On 08 May 2014 - 00:26 AM

If I remember correctly David Silva had a pretty low-key first season in England before totally coming alive in his second. I think it'll be the case with Ozil too.

FYI: He started slowly and didn't really hit top-form in the first-half of his first season but he came alive in the second-half then carried that form into the title-winning season.

#164121 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

07 May 2014 23:27:11

By Poe | On 07 May 2014 - 22:08 PM

Do we like Dzeko again now?

Still immensely frustrating but he's really stepped up in the last few weeks, so it's hard to complain about him too much.

#163563 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 13:38:17

By Ninja | On 06 May 2014 - 14:17 PM

Anyway, this site seems to have it pretty much spot on and is exactly what I'm saying. http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk

Ed Thompson, the bloke who runs that site, is a complete idiot. There was a long and surprisingly informative (and admittedly vitriolic) thread on Bluemoon a while back about the different ways he failed to understand FFP, not least with what constitutes a related party transaction. IIRC the bloke from Swiss Ramble even made an appearance.

#163562 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 13:35:53

By Ninja | On 06 May 2014 - 13:49 PM

And yet the balance of probility indicates that despite your insistances (and I'm not sure talking about deals signed in the future is at all a convincing rebuttal to the argument that it wasn't vastly inflated in the past) is that Uefa are giving it short thrift.

No the balance of probability is that UEFA have an issue with some part of our figures. The balance of speculation is that they have a problem with the Etihad deal.

True to a degree but UEFA are going to be trying to work out whether it has been 'vastly inflated' and they aren't just going to do that by looking at other deals signed in mid-2011. If they have any sense whatsoever they'll also be looking at deals signed since then but covering the same sort of period - e.g. United's £22.5m p/a training kit and training ground deal (via Telegraph) or Liverpool's £25m p/a deal with Warrior (via Guardian) or Chelsea's £30m p/a deal with Adidas (Daily Mail) - after that I don't think it's a massive jump to assume that they would try and establish what the sort of figures major companies (the likes of Nike, Adidas etc) would be willing to pay at the moment for a large sponsorship deal for a recent title-winner. After doing that, all but the most blinkered would have to agree that a figure of around £40-50m is not really 'vastly inflated' for a deal that covers kit, stadium and training ground.

#163544 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 12:47:51

By Carroll. | On 06 May 2014 - 13:43 PM

With the wage cap and PSG's 60mil transfer ban or whatever it is, aren't there simple loopholes such as performance bonuses etc or are they cracking down on that?

Good question and one I have absolutely no idea about.

#163538 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 12:35:33

By Ninja | On 06 May 2014 - 13:28 PM

But you, of course, know exactly.

No, I don't know exactly, it's generally reported as being between £40 and 50m a year which was I referred to it as £40m p/a. Even if it was a related party transaction (it's not) then considering the breadth of the deal, City could still make a compelling argument that it is 'fair value' especially so when you consider some of the ridiculous sponsorship deals that have been signed recently and are being mooted for the near future.

#163531 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 12:26:54

By Ninja | On 06 May 2014 - 13:22 PM

Almost every single news site reporting this is mentioning City falling foul of the rules because of the closeness of the owner to the sponsor. What you're saying simply doesn't tally with that.

Good for them. They've been saying that since it was announced with very little evidence to back it up, they haven't even managed to reach a consensus on exactly how much the deal is worth.

#163521 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

06 May 2014 12:13:40

I'd be treating all this with a hefty dose of salt to be honest. Seems a little bit too straightforward that City and PSG are supposedly receiving exactly the same punishment/settlement.

By Ninja | On 06 May 2014 - 12:28 PM

At any rate, it looks like City's biggest problem is the Eithad sponsorship deal which, tbf, stank. PSG's similar deal has been halved in valuation according to L'Equipe and a similar treatment of your one would presumably be pretty fatal to attempts at passing FFP, alongside the short shrift other creative account might be given.

There's nothing wrong with the Etihad deal, from what I've seen it's the IP sales and the losses that are the issue.

By Sheriff Skacel | On 06 May 2014 - 11:54 AM

Its the best sanction, reducing CL squads is the most effective way to ensure teams follow the rules. Don't really agree with the no rise in CL wage bill, I think that could definitely be contested in the courts. City appointed the same guys who set out FFP to try and get around it, so if anyone can find a loophole or a way around sanctions it will be City.

I'm very much not in favour of FFP but I was pleasantly surprised by the reduction of CL squads as a punishment. It demonstrates an intelligence that I don't normally associate with UEFA (or football's governing bodies in general).

Also, on the Etihad deal, for the last time there's nothing wrong with it according to the rules, no matter how much people say it looks dodgy. Etihad Airways aren't a related party under the FFP definitions (which happen to be copied from the International Accounting Standards) and even if it was it wouldn't really matter because the idea that ~£40m p/a deal to sponsor the kits, stadium, training ground/campus is excessive is absurd in the current climate. United had a £20m p/a deal just for their training ground ffs.

#163348 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

05 May 2014 21:16:41

By Deano | On 05 May 2014 - 22:06 PM

#BlameEverton

Damn right Barkley scored too soon, it's his fault.

#163341 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

05 May 2014 21:04:33

Fucking love it.

#163257 Transfer Rumours 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

05 May 2014 19:38:56

By Ninja | On 05 May 2014 - 18:21 PM

Spanish newspaper El Confidencial claiming that Chelsea's interest in Filipe Luis is because of Mourinho accepting Shaw is coming to United.

Not sure if this is based on any actual knowledge, or a bit of 2+2 from them,

Think the Telegraph said something similar when they reported the Costa + Luis deals the other day.

#162778 The Italian Football Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

04 May 2014 09:42:55

By Sheriff Skacel | On 03 May 2014 - 20:43 PM

The only thing that league has going for it is Newell's' abbreviation and Balanta.

NOB is funny but Balanta's not even the best centre-back in Argentina.

#162716 The Manchester City Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 21:31:31

Aye, fair play to him, he's been shit at times this season but he's really stepped up recently.

#162679 The Italian Football Thread

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 19:40:57

By Sheriff Skacel | On 03 May 2014 - 20:38 PM

The clubs need to grow a pair and handle the ultras like PSG handled theirs. Serie A is at risk of going the same way as the Argentinean league.

Pfft, it's nowhere near that funny. Or competitive.

#162662 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 18:30:01

That was horrific to sit through. Simultaneously really looking forward/really dreading the next two games now.

#162648 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 18:13:34

By Crane | On 03 May 2014 - 19:12 PM

Even with the injuries, it's comfortable.

I'm not going to do it now but I'll explain later why I'm saying it.

#162644 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 18:11:26

By Crane | On 03 May 2014 - 19:10 PM

Don't think it's an unfair suggestion that City have comfortably the best squad in the league.

Best first XI, not the best squad. Not comfortably anyway.

#162636 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 18:06:24

By Sam | On 03 May 2014 - 18:57 PM

As the above comments say, victory for City will pretty much secure fourth place for Arsenal. Jeez.

Did Toure pick up an injury?

No, not obviously. He's most likely just being rested.

By Telegram Sam | On 03 May 2014 - 19:04 PM

Barkley doesn't half roll around and whine a lot.

Really good player though.

#162618 Barclays Premier League 2013/14

bluemoon.

19 years ago

6 months ago

2,411

Premium

03 May 2014 17:46:58

By Telegram Sam | On 03 May 2014 - 18:42 PM

Lots of people on Twitter seem to think he is.

Yeah, I've heard it from United fans for a while but always ignored it. It was only when David Silva scored at Anfield (or assisted the own-goal, I forget which) and he stayed silent that I even noticed anything.

By Crane | On 03 May 2014 - 18:45 PM