The PL was criticised for "sleight of hand" but some left aghast at “a foreign state potentially blowing up an English institution” Others critical of the very notion of APTs when you're dealing with blurred lines of a state - and how it should be equity www.independent.co.uk/sport/footba... - ThreadSky

migueldelaney.bsky.social • 6 days ago

The PL was criticised for "sleight of hand" but some left aghast at “a foreign state potentially blowing up an English institution”

Others critical of the very notion of APTs when you're dealing with blurred lines of a state - and how it should be equity

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/man-city-premier-league-charges-apt-b2699389.html

Comments

ducksfantastico.bsky.social•6 days ago

It all feels too late. Football only saves itself by accepting the new reality. The Premier League probably needs a restructure that will enable a greater focus on European and International competition. Linked to this should be a mechanism to generate more income for the rest of the pyramid.

razorsgc.bsky.social•6 days ago

Amazing that the Premier League (and its constituent clubs) only gave a shit about this after the Newcastle takeover. Chelsea and Man City had already disrupted and distorted the division for years with oil / state-linked money. What great status quo does the league think it's protecting?

migueldelaney.bsky.social•6 days ago

But more to it than that. The Newcastle takeover came on top of the initial City Uefa case, after football leaks. Clubs began to wake up to the issues of state ownership, and those issues are fair to be concerned about.

razorsgc.bsky.social•6 days ago

Began to wake up to the issue of state ownership after a decade dominated by Man City.

Funny the things that make people "wake up".

Can't have Newcastle owners pumping money in and ruining the competitiveness of the league; that's purely a Manchester City privilege.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•6 days ago

but no one really saw City as state ownership until November 2018, when Football Leaks suddenly made clear the depth of state links. It was also the first time that Amnesty even used "sportswashing" about state ownership. It is understandable this caused a lot more agitation

razorsgc.bsky.social•6 days ago

A member of the Abu Dhabi royal family owning Manchester City wasn't seen as state ownership? What more would they have needed?

migueldelaney.bsky.social•6 days ago

I agree - but this is how it was seen for some time, as some sort of individual's private indulgence. The first article actually questioning any of it was by Nick McGeehan in December 2017

eapq.bsky.social•6 days ago

I'm not so sure about this Miguel. My sense is that everyone knew, or should have known, that when a Sovereign Wealth Fund purchases a football club like Man City, that club is owned by the Sovereign.

Clubs should not be owned by sovereign countries. The effect is distortion, not fair competition

migueldelaney.bsky.social•6 days ago

it wasn't a sovereign wealth fund, though. It was Mansour through the newly created ADUG.

Obviously, in reality, it is state owned

rickd64.bsky.social•5 days ago

Why are you so concerned about state ownership? Do you know how much leverage a huge US PE firm can get eg CFC spent $1bio, or a tech owner (eg Musk wanting to buy LFC). Surely the key is the biz model the owner follows...Mansour wants to max long term profit...no different to US owners really!

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

States seek to politically use clubs, which goes against what they are for. And consider what they are being politically used for.

rickd64.bsky.social•5 days ago

Surely no one really believes that now! Oil states have to diversify away from fossil fuels by building investment portfolios. If It was really about sportswashing why has Mansour sold 25pct to Silverlake.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

what do you think they are diversifying for? Also, Mubadala has invested billions into Silverlake.

alant89.bsky.social•4 days ago

The article is based on a false premise. City's legal win was that APT rule changes rushed in by the PL in 2021 were unlawful, so unless the PL was a barren wasteland before 2021, your argument holds no water. Nothing has been "blown up" - the latent meaning of your source's words has been noted btw

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

Also, what would the “latent meaning” be, exactly?

And the PL being unable to sort needed new financial rules, amid a governance crisis, would absolutely be chaos.

alant89.bsky.social•4 days ago

One potential latent meaning is the conjuring of images of brown skinned people blowing English things up. Even if not racially motivated, you must agree the language is inflammatory? I know it's your source's words but you/editor decide what to include. 1/2

alant89.bsky.social•4 days ago

The emotive, hyperbolic language just makes it seems like your piece is allowing people to vent their fury anonymously. Which is fine, you don't have to get both sides of the argument, you can take a side. But objectively, returning to 2021 rules isn't "complete carnage" is it? 2/2

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

Also, the piece is an attempt to explore the significance of the developments. I quoted people who were sympathetic to City’s point on this.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

Also, re the potential effect, I can assure you it’s a common view and that’s due to what it would mean for where PL governance is, not to mention the potential for a brief reversion to old rules.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

Why would someone’s mind even leap to that? They’re fairly common figures of speech in such legal battles, all the more so given the previous leaks here about “destruction” of Uefa. (Have amended this post tbf)

alant89.bsky.social•4 days ago

Because of the difference in coverage of Middle Eastern v American owners, many of whom are trying to change how the game is governed, or funnelling owner money in through loans, or leveraging debt against their club etc etc. Environmentalism aside, why is oil money "dirty"? Worth thinking about 1/2

alant89.bsky.social•4 days ago

American interference in UK institutions? Now that's something for the haughty English sources to get on high horses about.

And re the "assumption", I'm here with a face and name giving my personal view of the language used, because I'll happily stand over my comments, unlike your sources tbf. 2/2

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

Hold on, none of this has ever been about “oil money”, ethnicity or nationality. It’s about that it’s an autocratic state, with all of the bigger issues that entails. You can’t just overlook this fairly salient fact.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

This stuff about “latent meaning” is quite strange given the leaked emails show Cliff purportedly quoting Khaldoon in talking about the “destruction” of Uefa. That set the tone in all of this.

amff.bsky.social•5 days ago

The problem isnt restricted to Nations theyre just the pinacle. The problem is foreign ownership. Its not compatible with British sport, and all for their own unique reasons.

As fans were left in the same state as politics, hoping that Europe introduces rulings that also influence domestically.

dino-v.bsky.social•4 days ago

Have you got any proof of this state ownership, or are you just going off some alleged hacking? Seem to recall the same hack made a serious sexual allegation about a footballer which has, quite rightly, never been mentioned again as presumed innocent. Yet City definitely guilty...

migueldelaney.bsky.social•4 days ago

the state ownership description doesn't come out of Football Leaks (and the veracity of the emails has never been disputed). It's the fact that Sheikh Mansour is a senior royal... and in an autocracy. He is the state. Why do you think the state's most prominent officials run the club?

unitedmobecho.bsky.social•5 days ago

States want an unregulated free market so they can do what they want. The Prem & UEFA want mild regulation. This is the case outside of football, with the water companies, energy companies etc. Unregulated free markets vs regulated is the major issue with capitalism right now.

city-tactics.bsky.social•6 days ago

Would the ‘complete carnage’ be a short-term return to pre Dec 2021 status before a lawful re-drafting of apt rules?

Feels somewhat hyperbolic.

originaldelboy.bsky.social•6 days ago

Clearly whatever the outcome of the Man City charges, it's painting a very inept picture of the Premiere League who have little to no control over their own product.

mikehausen.bsky.social•6 days ago

The way I see it, Man City's attack on the APT rules aren't directly related to the IC investigation into the 130 charges. This is more likely to be that Man City know they're about to be heavily sanctioned, and hooe that the APT rules they've changed will sustain them during a period outside the PL

richburroughs.dev•6 days ago

Currently they’d need a 27 point deduction to put them in the relegation battle. That’s never going to happen, but even if it did, it would also have to hold up on appeal.

mikehausen.bsky.social•6 days ago

Why would you say that'll never happen? Look at the punishments handed down to Everton & Forest based on 2 and 1 charges, respectively. The charges were nowhere near as serious, involved no deception, and those clubs cooperated with the PL investigations

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

would the premier league's rules on associated party transactions apply to a club outside of the premier league? (genuine question, i don't know the answer).

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

No, it's a PL rule

pudsey68.bsky.social•6 days ago

So PL clubs have been actively campaigning about the need for a regulator (👋 Lady Brady) but are also worried it won't be strong enough!
If only the PL wasn't 20 individual clubs, riven with self-interest and greed instead of being concerned about the good of the game!

migueldelaney.bsky.social•6 days ago

some clubs (ironically) argue the regulator isn't strong enough on this key issue

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

miguel. the article mentions the (we're told looming) regulator. do we know how many of the current twenty premier league clubs are in favour of a regulator, and if so who?

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

Now, none of them. If you are getting at the reports that City previously pushed for it, that was a Tory bill. The Labour regulator is very different. There have been pushes to include amendments for state or state-linked owners to divest, which City obviously wouldn't support.

rickd64.bsky.social•5 days ago

Do you have any contacts at City? Pretty sure they would prefer a fair independent regulator to the PL regulating their own league with significant bias towards certain red teams!

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

bias? Every decision comes down to a vote that requires a majority of 14.

And City probably don't want a version of the regulator where there amendments about state ownerships eventually divesting.

rickd64.bsky.social•5 days ago

have you actually asked City what their view is or is your relationship with the club so bad that that is pointless?

rickd64.bsky.social•5 days ago

Are you claiming that certain clubs don't have more influence eg LFC and MU had a say in who was PL head! As for the 14 votes...that hasn't stopped them from issuing rules (eg APT) that are not fit for purpose (how could they agree that allowing interest free loans is not financial doping!

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

literally every single club votes in their own interest and only their own interest. And that is the only way you get decisions through.

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

i don't agree with rick, i believe the city being pro-regulator stuff was noise leaking from within the club given the ongoing pl battle, but there aren't going to be any state ownership clauses (even if it does ever come in) when the uk is cap and hand to the middle east for investment, come on.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

They've already removed the clause about the regulator being subject to foreign policy, though

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

no, i've never been convinced by talk of city being pro-regulation, for me that didn't quite add up. i mean more that i'm surprised certain other clubs aren't in favour - arsenal and liverpool say, or well-run midtable clubs like brentford as an example.

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

i'd be very surprised if labour brought a football regulator in at a time when the country is on its knees for overseas investment. everything we've seen from starmer so far suggests he'll take pragmatic (and that's being kind) decisions on economic matters.

booster1a.bsky.social•5 days ago

The premier league clubs don't want more of their tv revenue to be distributed to the football league.

migueldelaney.bsky.social•5 days ago

There is a real impetus within the Labour government for this, tbf

iaindowie.bsky.social•5 days ago

in the wider party maybe, but surely hard to see how they could introduce it without alienating those nearer the top of what's a very short list of viable trade partners with deep pockets, especially if the us/europe trade stuff ramps up. in the very least they'll skirt around that element of it.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply