A whole sport can’t be labelled as corrupt though? Everyone plays by the same rules in the localised sporting competition, and there isn’t a law of the game that explicitly favours City, or teams from Manchester, at all.
Yes, there are allegations against City that will need to be proven in due course. You may very well be correct - but equally so, you may not. Perhaps it’s premature to proceed on the basis that they have cheated, albeit I am with you that it is likely they did, I just find myself unable to assert this with any certainty.
Does the ownership test need to be more stringent? Yes, potentially. Are there external considerations in the application of the ownership test? More than likely. But the idea of disparity in earning capability, and therefore the disparity in wages, ability to spend, and attractiveness of clubs, has always been an issue in England for as long as I can remember. With freedom of movement and loosening of borders through the EU came the consequence of freedom of cross-border finance and capitalism. Football clubs, especially depressed ones, have a remarkable ceiling for improvement on initial investment and so are attractive to a whole host of actors globally in the last decade or two at least.
It’s just more visible now because of the ever increasing numbers in football finance, the disconnect from reality of regular people, the stream of information easily available on the internet, and the pricing out of those who used to regularly attend matches. But all of this was inevitable in a model where fan ownership is not statutorily guaranteed and working class fans have no presence on the board.
If a single thing can be pinpointed as the cause of this rat race, for me, it’s when football gate receipts stopped being shared.
A very reasonable reply there. I'm a bit short on time just now so will just quickly comment on the first paragraph. I think the whole sport can indeed be labelled corrupt at this point. Of course, that doesn't mean everyone in the sport is corrupt. But, for me, it means that many of those that hold the power within it are rotten to the core. We all know that FIFA and UEFA are absolutely rancid.
We all know that PGMOL are at best unfit for purpose and riddled with bias. We all know these nation state owners are in it for political purposes rather than sporting. Sadly, our sport is infested with pure self-interest. Do the rules of the game favour the likes of Abu Dhabi FC? No, not in their written form. Thing is, by all accounts they don't play by the rules anyway.
On the pitch, they have been the beneficiary of utterly inexplicable decisions that have won them league titles. The rules (handball rule in that case) were interpreted in a way there that handed them a title. Literally. So no particular rule favours them, but how those rules are interpreted certainly seem to when it comes to critically crucial moments.
Was that sinister, or was it simply gross incompetence? Did bias play a part? Who knows? This cesspool is full of different kinds of turd. As another poster suggested, it's difficult to know which turd is which at times, but we still know it's a turd.
Anyway, can we call the sport overall as corrupt? I suppose we have to draw our own conclusions because no one is going to provide us with definitive proof one way or the other. Personally, I'd call it corrupt. Not everyone
in it is corrupt, of course. In the war, not every German was a Nazi, but the significant players were. In football, many of the significant players
are dodgy at best.
There is plenty of parties with mutual self-intetest. A clearly corrupt British government stepping in to usher a nation state into our sport at Newcastle shows it goes right to the very top. Many of the significant players (in ownership etc) are extremely dodgy people with incredible power and influence. Such influence has the power to shape things. Shape attitudes, shape approaches, shape outcomes. Saudi pressure shaped British government approach to sportswashing in this country. Let that sink in for a moment. The British government waved actual murderers into football club ownership here. We know this is true. That's no conspiracy theory. It's happened in plain sight and without apology. We clearly witness just how much sway these people and their money have, yet some draw the line at the suggestion that this influence might just be making its presence felt in significant moments on the field of play.
You know, I hope I'm completely wrong and talking through my arse. Honestly, I don't want to be right on this at all. I'd prefer it all to be down to human fallibility and incompetence, because at least they can be addressed and improved. But looking at who the significant players in football these days actually are - UEFA, FIFA, Premier League, despot nation states etc, I think my, and millions of other people's, fears do have real foundation.
Ah, that took a while and I'm late now.
. I'll leave it there.