Damocles

I'm pretty sure that's the most unintentionally hilarious post I've read on here.

The UAE's economy is built on sand? No mate, it's built on money. TRILLIONS of dollars worth of it.

The comments about United and ours/theirs show you up as a wind up anyway, so I'll leave it as I get the feeling that this will result in me getting banned somewhere down the line.

I think chanting his name would have been better but hey BlueMoon know what's best.

We do that too.

Speaking of sponsorship, we've just heard over on BM that we've got a new sponsor in Aabar. This is a company that was setup by ADIA (who the Sheikh is on the board of) and Mubadala (that our Chairman is Chairman of). They also own the IPIC, which is the big money spender over there, chaired by Sheikh Mansour. The business structure of that place is just unbelievably thick and the Sheikh/Khaldoon seem to have invested in everything in the world.

Damocles, just a question with your research did you look into Sharia Law? and whether this law is carried out in Abu Dhabi.

Without starting a political thread, yes. Sharia courts in Abu Dhabi are only available to Muslims, so you actually have to believe in Sharia Law to be tried under it.

Well Villa were'nt exactly in a great state towards the end of the Ellis years, and Randy Lerner has transformed many areas of the club for the better, but we haven't been unfurling banners around the stadium "thanking" him for that. Lerner doesn't need our appreciation, he's not in it as a vanity project.

Neither's the Sheikh, as has been mentioned. I'm sure that Villa weren't in a great state towards the end of the Ellis, but I'm also pretty sure that you weren't 18 days away from extinction.

Besides, I have no idea how exactly any group of football fans can be considered classy. Each club has its dickheads and has its intellectuals. The idea of 'class' amongst a group of fans is a myth. I can point to the fact that one of our fans was injured and was in a coma in Germany after falling down stairs at a train station, and our club paid all of his medical bills, and supported his young family. That's classy.

Then I can point to the Munich songs that are sometimes heard when we play United as not classy.

It's just another example of football fans trying to gain oneupmanship with others. "We have more class", "we have more history", "we have more money" are all entirely meaningless things. Tell me what you've done on the pitch and in your community over the last decade.

Etihad Airways is connected to our owner in some way, as are our new sponsors, Ferrostaal and the Abu Dhabi Tourist Board. We're supposed to be announcing some big new deals soon too, he isn't daft the Sheikh.

That banner on the last page is so small time and embarassing. Talk about bending over backwards and taking it up the arse. I wonder how many will thank him in 3 years time when ticket prices have gone up by stupid amounts and the stadium is devoid of any atmosphere, largely full of happy-clapping tourists? Furthermore, they haven't won jack shit yet so there is nothing really to be thankful of!

The Sheikh has been the owner for two years, and we still have some of the cheapest season tickets in the land. The whole stadium has just been completely rearranged to create a better atmosphere, with all of the 'kids/old people/families' now going in the larger North Stand and all of the singing lads moving to the rest of the ground.

Besides all of this, as I'm starting to expect from some people on here, you don't possess enough knowledge to comment. The "Manchester Thanks You" banner isn't because we are suddenly rich, or that he's buying all these players. Unlike United, who have always been a nomadic club, City have always had it's root as the peoples club of Manchester, and a common thing heard is that all footy fans in Manchester are blue (not really the true, but based in it).

We have always had an identity in the city around us, and have always been a huge part of the community, the schools, etc.

This stems back to when we first were founded, by a vicar as something for the local tearaway youths to do in the late 19th century. We've always been working in the local area, and our City In The Community program has won award after award; the guy who runs it was recently given an MBE actually.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, before the takeover that made Peter Swales Chairman in the 70's, we have always been a middling to successful club. Sometimes winning the big one, but we've picked up FA Cups before, League Cups and have been up there or thereabouts in terms of both league position and attendances.

Peter Swales was the worse thing to happen to our club. He took the team that had just won the double, sold all of it's superstars for next to no money, then paid ridiculous prices for players simply because United wanted them. That's not a joke either, that's actually the reason he gave for signing players, so "them across the road couldn't have them". In addition to this, he **** about our greatest ever manager, Joe Mercer and appointed his egotistical assistant, Malcolm Allison, who also didn't help much. Swales took us from a healthy club, that was winning things to a club facing bankruptcy.

Former City hero Franny Lee had made himself some money selling bog roll after he finished playing (how apt!), so he bought the club. Then he saw the extent of the damage, though it doesn't sound bad now, we were £20m in debt. He didn't have that type of money, but to make matters far, far worse, he appointed constant failure Alan Ball as manager, and that's when the freefall really started.

The brother of the Chief Exec of Manchester City Council then took over him as we were in the Second Division and hugely in debt. He did well enough to start the negotiation with the Council and Sport England over the CoM stadium, which really helped us debt wise. However, he fell out with major investor John Wardle over the transfer of Robbie Fowler and later resigned.

John Wardle of JD Sports chain took over, and the tide was pretty much against him by now. The debts from the past were never really settled to any degree, and even with the stadium move, we were in trouble. We have thrown money away on expensive flops such as Fowler, etc, for years to keep us in the Premiership instead of servicing the debt. The thinking was that higher revenues now, means that we could eventually pay our debts, as our Academy was really starting to produce now thanks to Keegan and his large investment in it.

Obviously though, this was just pissing in to the wind, and one of our darkest days happened when we were sold to Shinawatra. The promise is that Shinawatra would clear the debts and as a billionaire, would invest in the team. With us using our Academy now, surviving in the Prem due to a mixture of them and great little imports such as Mpenza, we thought that our future was bright.

Unfortunately, my biggest mistake was one of lack of research. When I was told we were taken by him, I thought "Oh good, just some Thai billionaire, great! All those Thai guys are all billionaires!" or some other ridiculous stereotype not unlike the "Arab playboy" image some have of the Sheikh. As the weeks went by, it was becoming more and more apparent that Shinawatra wasn't all that he seemed, culminating in an expose by the Daily Telegraph that labelled him as a human rights abuser of the worst kind, and a guy who was basically using us for political ambition. I've been crushed many times by City, but never quite as hard as this, and felt pretty guilty for putting money in his pocket. It also turned out that City had surpassed themselves once again, and found the only penniless billionaire on the planet. Shinawatra had no money, our debts were worst than ever and we were hanging by a thread. I don't mean we were heading for administration, no administrator on the planet would consider us a viable business, we were about to be closed down for good. The club I've followed my whole life, had been such a great part of the community and in particularly of my life as a person was about to disappear into thin air. We as fans were truly at our wits end, and I remember waking up every day feeling sick before I loaded up BBC News, expecting to see the "Man City Close Down" headline.

Then, out of absolutely nowhere, we bought Wright Phillips for £9m and Vincent Kompany for £6m. I did remember thinking "how the **** can we afford THAT", and thinking that we had finally lost our minds and were going out with a bang. Then, again out of nowhere, with no rumours beforehand, it was announced that we had been taken over by Abu Dhabi United Group. I didn't make the same mistake as I did with Shinawatra, I looked into these properly and looked into the Sheikh, until I was happy that he had money and wasn't a war criminal. Happily, he has money. LOTS of money. Then little things started happening around the club, changes in infrastructure, better training machines, better organisation, better website, etc. All of this would mean nothing to me, but one of the absolute tenets of the Sheikh's ownership has been how fan orientated it has been. These guys truly get it, in terms of how we look at the club, and the level of communication between the fans and the club has never been higher. Gary Cooke isn't just our distant CEO we see on TV, he comes to Bluemoon meetups and gets a round in. The club are always asking the internet forums and bloggers, the supporters clubs, and even random guys who go into the shop to test their latest stuff or to ask what they think about a new policy.

It's easy for other fans to sit on top of their tower and snipe that "the Arabs will do this" or "the banner is small time". I don't care, it's not there to impress you. We are there as fans of this club every day, and we have experienced the rollercoaster of that support. It's there to remind us as fans exactly what this new owner has done for us. He's literally saved our lives, he's made the fans the central part of the club and expanded even more into helping the local area, he's introduced a brand new level of communication between us, and is willing to listen to our desires over things like the bar staff at half time, the beer we sell, the roof on the ticket office, the price/loyalty points scheme of certain games. People forget that last season we had quite a few matches where we sold tickets at £5 for kids and £10 for adults in the League Cup. This wasn't some thing that they put in at the last minute, this was announced weeks before the LC tickets went on sale. We've had fan days in close season, where kids go to the ground, get their facepainted, play at the fair, watch the players train and get some autographs. This was entirely free. Our preseason games are shown live, for free, on our website in HD quality.

As I say, it's easy to sit back on your stereotypical view of what's happening at City and bark off some remarks about exactly what our owners will do. But unless you lived the life, you cannot possibly understand how important that banner is.

According to Tribal Football, Milner is waiting until the 25th to decide his future.

So another two weeks of this yet

[This is actually a reply to a post in the Milner thread, but I didn't want to write all of this and it get pulled for being off topic]

If you look at United's record pre-Ferguson, ON TROPHIES ALONE I wouldn't call them one of the world's biggest clubs. Fanbase, perhaps as they were ably helped out by the sympathy afforded to them after the Munich Air Disaster. Ground; definitely not, OT used to be a complete dump whereas Maine Road was called the Wembley of the North (when that was something to be impressed by).

Anyway, again I'm confused with what a 'big club' is. We've historically had a large and loyal fanbase though not one that is particularly international with the exception of ex-pat countries. Stadium wise, hopefully you would agree that the City of Manchester Stadium is really nice, and work is still being done on it (here's a picture taken today of our new pitch and details of current building work ) to make it bigger and better. The owner is very much into his properties and his fancy looking stuff, and we've just put a BILLION into the local area around the stadium. This is the side that people don't seem to see with the new owners, it isn't just about spunking money on players. That billion quid we've just put into East Manchester will create more than a few thousand jobs too, in one of the poorest areas of the city. As a comparison, Manchester United was sold for £800m a few years ago.

This is what many don't seem to grasp. Sheikh Mansour and his family aren't idiot playboys with nothing better to do than buy some daft (and enigmatic!) club and use it as a plaything. They are serious businessmen, who have a business plan. It's the same business plan as everywhere else in Abu Dhabi. They have oil now. Due to this they have money now. They won't have oil in a few decades. Due to that, they won't have money in a few decades. Spend money now, buy businesses so that they will support you in later years. Whereas Dubai threw money at stupid buildings and hoped that tourism would drive from the "wow factor", the Sheikh's thing is sport. He (and especially our Chairman, Khaldoon, who owns 5% of Ferrari) was instrumental to bringing in the Abu Dhabi GP. Same with the yacht race, the World Club Cup, and the horse race that's meant to be big over there. They are using sports branding to make money and raise the profile of their Emirate, and it seems to work somewhat, as I knew nothing about the place before they took over.

So, as far as 'big club' status goes, I don't really know. I don't think we will be a bigger club than United in the short or medium term certainly, but as well all know, football is cyclic in this country. 20 years ago, it was unthinkable that Leeds could be in the third tier, United could be beaten to the title by Chelsea and Liverpool could be nearly bankrupt. Every empire falls, and just as Liverpool did, United will eventually.

The thing that winds me up is the whole "City will NEVER be bigger than United". These people don't seem to grasp what forever means, or have access to the next 1000 years of football results ala Back To The Future. Or think the world will end in 2012.

Actually, I'm pretty convinced that the world will end in 2012 now. We'll have just signed Torres and Messi, beaten United in the Cup Semi Final to go on and face Scunny in the Finals, and be three points away from winning the title mathematically. Then the world will end. It's written in the stars, I can bloody see it coming.

We have a habit of announcing signings to coincide with merchandising opportunities.

Was that before or after you were a really really really big club?

I never claimed City were a 'really really really big club', I claimed that Villa weren't.

Thinking about it, I don't even know what big club means, that many people use it. We've got lots of fans if that's what you mean, and a long history?

I'm starting to think that when people say 'big club' they really mean 'successful club', and they don't seem to recognise that being big and being successful are two entirely different concepts.

It's to sell shirts in Abu Dhabi and they'll ask Milner who's that lol, good merchandising!

You think that people in would buy a City shirt in Abu Dhabi wouldn't know who Player of the Year, England International James Milner is?

Besides, Abu Dhabi isn't that much of an interest to our marketing team, more the US and Asian markets that United/Liverpool have monopolised for so long. That's more where the money is, there's only a quarter of the people in AD than in Manchester, it isn't a big place.

It's more about the fact that United are still early in their renewal period when the story came out, so they could well have done. Not sure about you guys, but usually don't renew until the very last minute.

I think MON will hold out for 30m. If that figure is not met, I think Milner will stay a Villa player AND he'll sign a one year extension.

As I said, the Milner post before is just using a bit of informed estimation and I wouldn't be surprised if we he stayed. The thing is, City have identified a weakness that Milner obviously fills, and I can't think of another player out there who is like him. I'd be surprised if we don't sign him, purely because he's probably worth £30m to us if you look at it as a percentage of our transfer budget.

Firstly, if I was you, I'd have a look at Spurs' transfer record and their business structure a few years ago before shouting about sugar daddies.

I'm not really arsed how you feel about City's success, I for one would be delighted with any trophy.

Besides, let's have a look at your managers record with his previous clubs, shall we?

Bournemouth - went bankrupt

West Ham - went bankrupt

Pompey - went bankrupt

Southampton - went bankrupt

Spurs - ?????

The subject of Harry as a manager has precisely nothing to do with the issue I raised, namely City having failed to make it under their own steam and now resorting to total reliance on a sugar daddy to try and buy success for them.

In any case, Harry did not control the purse strings at any previous club, just as he doesn't at Spurs. It's the club owners who decide what budget they give a manager - and if they spend more than they can afford then that's down to them alone.

You don't rate Harry as a manager? That's fine by me. I'm happy enough knowing that he'll be taking Spurs into our shot at the CL and that along the way to this point we blew City out of the water - twice, home and away.

Your post implies that you're wondering if Spurs will end up bankrupt. But I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you: Spurs are one of the best-run clubs in the Prem financially speaking. Moreover, we earn every penny we get, whilst City fans stamp their feet and scream for their sugar-daddy to give them yet another £100m cheque to buy the latest set of shiny new toys.

I don't believe that Spurs will be going bankrupt any time soon.

To be absolutely fair, as I'm an admin on Bluemoon and spend an awful lot of time on there, I would think that I have a better grasp of our fan's opinions and attitudes than you. In my view, most City fans aren't stamping their feet and demanding anything, most of them are simply thankful that we are lucky enough to be run by a multi-billionaire.

I'll direct you to the thread discussing the news of David Silva officially signing. All over it, were posts declaring "Thank you Sheik Mansour" and the like. We're appreciative and realise that we've won the lottery in terms of owners. After Shinawatra, Wardle, Lee and Swales, we were due a good one.

Over at Bluemoon, we have pooled our money together and got us a banner, directly facing where Khaldoon, Cook and one day hopefully, Sheikh Mansour will sit.

This is hardly the behaviour of petulant fans who stamp their feet demanding players.

I agree that Spurs at WHL was embarrassing to watch, and this was a large part of Hughes' sacking. The results were not coming, he lost the dressing room, and that performance was infuriating. He was tactically outdone by Redknapp, and he really showed his lack of ideas that day.

Spurs at CoM was a different story, and we lost because of a really simple reason; our expensively assembled group of players had no team spirit or togetherness. This game was the one that showed the fans that were unaware that building a team takes time, and throwing money at something doesn't guarantee you anything.

Khaldoon Al-Mubarak (our Chairman) gave one of his bi-annual video interviews on the OS straight after this game, and I was more than happy with his responses. He's a knowledgeable guy, and he makes a fantastic impression on both the fans and players. He appealed for calm amongst the fans, and explained that in his opinion, we had a good season, despite finishing 5th.

Considering that we were in the race for fourth until the second to last game of the season, and we got to a Semi Final of the Carling Cup, after coming 10th the previous year, it was ok. Disappointing that we didn't do better, but we would have taken 5th if it was offered at the beginning of the season, just as we'd bite your hand off for 4th now despite the noises of challenging for the title.

You'll have to disregard anything I say about Redknapp's ability as biased talk, as I have an extreme hatred of the man.

Spurs are now in an interesting position. You have to decide whether to really go for it, spend big cash to secure CL for another year or take the cash from the CL and consolidate. I expect that you will be challenging the top four again this coming season, but think that you'll be much more of a threat now that your team is maturing together.

I'm here, and I think you'll find that MysteryMan said that he spoke to some City guys at a golf day who said that the deal was done.

For the record, I personally believe the deal to be done, but haven't said so in the past. Just as we waited until the day that the seasoncards went on general sale to unveil Toure/Silva, I think we'll announce it the day that the away shirt becomes available, which I believe is July 15th. We have a habit of announcing signings to coincide with merchandising opportunities.

well that worked well didn't it? 18,000 ST's sold so far, pathetic

You're wrong, we've broken all season ticket records this year. Last year, we sold over 30,000 of them. Proof

You're thinking of Man United, who it was recently claimed in an article had only sold 18,000. Article.

I'm here, and I think you'll find that MysteryMan said that he spoke to some City guys at a golf day who said that the deal was done.

For the record, I personally believe the deal to be done, but haven't said so in the past. Just as we waited until the day that the seasoncards went on general sale to unveil Toure/Silva, I think we'll announce it the day that the away shirt becomes available, which I believe is July 15th. We have a habit of announcing signings to coincide with merchandising opportunities.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3047228/Manchester-Citys-20million-raid-for-Didier-Drogba.html

Yup they want Drogba, and if ruddy Yaya Toure is on 220K a week.

We're not in for Drogba. You can pretty much ignore EVERYTHING that is printed in the Sun or NOTW about City. The Club makes a point of never talking to them about anything. The Daily Mail is your best for City news.

It's frustrating that despite the fact that I've pointed out the original "£220k" story, and shown why it's a complete lie (that I've been told we ARE suing over), people still seem to believe that he's on those wages. I'll reiterate this, Toure is on £160k a week, after bonuses and before tax.

We aren't selling Adebayor; we rejected a £15m approach from Milan for him only a month or so ago.

Having failed to get where they want to be through their own efforts and abilities, what City are now attempting to do is follow in Chelsea's footsteps: namely to buy success with money that the club has not itself generated nor borrowed with a view to paying the sums back.

Just like Chelsea, City are no longer seen as as a proper football club - you have become a rich man's plaything, nothing more. Any success you achieve will be hollow, not earnt, not deserved.

And yes, the sugar-daddy syndrome is damaging football - quite badly in my view.

Firstly, if I was you, I'd have a look at Spurs' transfer record and their business structure a few years ago before shouting about sugar daddies.

I'm not really arsed how you feel about City's success, I for one would be delighted with any trophy.

Besides, let's have a look at your managers record with his previous clubs, shall we?

Bournemouth - went bankrupt

West Ham - went bankrupt

Pompey - went bankrupt

Southampton - went bankrupt

Spurs - ?????

Heard nothing about Richards recently. There were whispers about Spurs, but nothing credible that I can recall, quite honestly, I don't really know.

There's nothing doing on a transfer for MJ at the moment and he's very determined to get back in our first team and repay the faith shown in him for the past three years.

Anyway, I have just come across this story in the NOTW. This was the one that I was whinging about, as full of lies, and the one where the rumour of £220k a week came from:

MONEY-MAD Manchester City are to make Barcelona reject Yaya Toure the highest-paid player in Premier League history by handing him a phenomenal five-year deal worth a minimum £55.6MILLION.

Toure will become the first footballer in England to smash the £200,000-a-week wage barrier.

And today we lift the lid on the craziest contract in English football - signed off by City chief executive Garry Cook.

The staggering sums will astonish fans already fed up with over-paid stars failing to justify their super-sized salaries.

Ivory Coast midfielder Toure - who played just 16 games for the Spanish champions last season - will receive a guaranteed £4.1million a year basic salary AFTER tax.

On top of that he will get an image rights payment of £1.65m a year (with a profit-share on his shirt sales) PLUS an £823,000 bonus each time City qualify for the Champions League PLUS a £412,000 bonus for winning Europe's top competition PLUS additional bonuses for winning the Premier League and FA Cup - all tax-free.

It means City will pay him a basic salary this season of a whopping £185,000 a week before tax.

Incredible

That figure will rise to an incredible £221,000 a week next April when the Government's new 50 per cent tax bracket comes into force - dwarfing the wages of England stars Wayne Rooney, Steven Gerrard, Rio Ferdinand, Frank Lampard and John Terry.

It also means City will have to fork out a basic £55.6m in wages over the five years - with that figure set to soar if Roberto Mancini's team are successful.

That is on top of the £24m transfer fee - making the total deal a minimum £79.6MILLION.

Toure - younger brother of City defender Kolo - passed his medical in Manchester last Monday after the transfer had been ratified by incoming Barca president Sandro Rossell, and the move was completed on Friday.

Toure, 27, has joined a squad full of inflated salaries as City go in search of the silverware to justify billionaire Arab owner Sheikh Mansour's remarkable outlay.

"This is a dream come true," said Toure.

"I have always wanted to play for the same club as my brother and I am so happy that it has finally happened.

"It's great for our family.

"Kolo told me that it's an amazing time for the club and a very exciting project.

"I love the Premier League and I watch it all the time.

"City did very well to finish fifth last season but I hope we can improve on that by qualifying for the Champions League.

"This is a big club and that has to be our first objective and then we have to look at winning championships as well."

City have also signed David Silva from Valencia for £24m and £11m Hamburg defender Jerome, and are still aiming to complete a £25m deal to buy England midfielder James Milner from Aston Villa.

But it is the details of Toure's mega-contract which will send shockwaves through football.

After lengthy talks with Barcelona and Toure's agent Dimitri Seluk at the end of the season, Cook finally made his offer in the week before the start of the World Cup.

City's in-house lawyer Simon Cliff, appointed from Shearman and Sterling in April 2009 and previously a consultant for Sheikh Mansour, helped mastermind the extraordinary deal.

History

Toure made just 13 starts for Barcelona in all competitions last season after losing his place to Spanish World Cup star Sergi Busquets and completed 90 minutes just nine times.

But now he will become the highest-paid player in the history of the Premier League.

Toure will earn a basic £5.75m a year AFTER tax, meaning he will take home £110,500 a week.

A trifle excessive perhaps for a player who has never played a full league season for any of his previous clubs.

And a trifle excessive perhaps for a Barca substitute who manager Pep Guardiola told was surplus to requirements at the Nou Camp.

Granted, Toure was outstanding in Barca's 2009 Champions League final victory over Manchester United in Rome.

But, incredibly, City believe his arrival suddenly turns them into major players and are convinced fans will all soon be wearing City shirts emblazoned with Toure's name on the back.

And, despite having four defensive midfielders on the books in Gareth Barry, Vincent Kompany, Nigel de Jong and Patrick Vieira, City still felt the need for a fifth.

The figures went through the roof just as Seluk was threatening to pull the plug on the entire deal.

Cook held several meetings in Barcelona with Seluk, along with football administrator Brian Marwood and various other City officials.

During City's amazing bid for Toure, they also offered to use their considerable "muscle" with sportwear manufacturers Nike and Umbro to get the midfielder a better boot deal.

Italian coach Mancini now has to somehow shoe-horn Toure into City's bulging team.

And Mancini has been left in no doubt by Cook they want Premier League title glory this season.

As I have said before, Neil Ashton and the NOTW have a personal vendetta towards City since we sued them (and won) about them printing lies about us).

Unfortunately for them, they have done it again, in the bolded areas, and I can prove it. This is important, as despite everybody at City saying that Toure is on £160k a week before tax and after bonuses, the fans have somehow being left with the impression that the lad is on £220k a week.

1. The article states that Toure had his medical in Manchester. That is verifiably false. We can prove this, as fortunately, mcfc.co.uk cameras were at Toure's medical, in Spain and it is on the OS. You can tell it's Spain purely because of all of the Spanish signs on the door, and the fact that the nurse is speaking Spanish.

2. He states that Toure made 13 starts for Barcelona, when he made 26 (and more coming from the bench).

3. He states that Barcelona didn't want him, but both the chairman and the manager are quoted as saying that they wanted to keep him.

4. He states that we have 4 DMs in Barry, Kompany, De Jong and Viera. Now, sorry to break this to him, but Kompany is a CB. I know that, because with the exception of one or two games a couple of season ago, he's always played CB for City. I don't need to tell Villa fans that Barry isn't a DM, but a box to boxer. That leaves us with two by my count, and one of them is older than the Bible.

5. How exactly Man City can exert pressure on somebody who pays us money, I'm not sure, and to be honest I find unrealistic that we can demand that Nike give him a better deal (as that's who he is signed with, I have no idea where the Umbro thing has come from).

Every single forum in the world believes that the papers have a vendetta against them, and it is mostly false. Journalists write things that are purposefully inflammatory, yet this stuff with the NOTW/Sun and City is just ridiculous. I imagine that we will be taking legal action over this story as well, it's about time that we cracked down on these idiot journalists.

Y'know, that Brian Wooly fellow today blamed City for ruining the English football team, despite us having 5 England internationals in our team, having 36 Academy graduates in the last ten years, and the England U20 first team is over 50% City players who have all come through our ranks.

This talk about us ruining football is just stupid. As I have said in the past, I don't feel the need to exaggerate because the truth is bad enough. What we as a club are doing, is levelling the playing field with the Big Four, after they have had years of regular investment due to the CL, which afforded them the best players, and the highest wages. We are doing this in a tiny period of time, whereas they stretch it out over seasons.

Is it fair? Not even a bit.

This whole thing about rich owners is just crap, and doesn't make a lick of sense. The problem is the fact that the CL generates so much money that the top four effectively have a monopoly that cannot be broken unless you spend ridiculous money AND one of them has a bad season.

I don't pretend to know the answer; CL TV money can't be spread across the whole league as it is run by UEFA and not the Premier League. Maybe the Prem could actually drop the prize money for finishing in the top four to reflect the differences in income? Probably another silly idea.

I may not know the answers to it, but I can certainly identify the root problems. Billionaire owners level the playing field between the top four and those without it. Unfortunately, it also creates a new slant on nnon-top four, non-billionaire owners. We need to fix the thing that has made the game so monopolised, which is the CL, before we can fix the billionaire problem.

You are correct about Kompany, not really sure what I was thinking on that one. Out of the entire squad so far, I imagine our 25 will be:

Given

Hart

Richards

Bridge

Zabaleta

Kompany

Toure

Lescott

M Johnson

SWP

A Johnson

Barry

Viera

De Jong

Toure

Silva

Tevez

Adebayor

RSC

I expect the rest of them to go, and for us to fill in the gaps with new signings. We have 8 homegrowns in the list above, and I've left out U21 players. We've just signed a 19 year old Columbian keeper, so I imagine he'll be number 3 instead of Gunnar (who's off to Tranmere) or Gonzalez (who nobody can work out why Hughes signed). Obviously, Boateng needs to go in there, as does Weiss. Still think we look a little light on strikers, considering that Bellamy is expected to leave.

We're rumoured with a few different ones; Dzeko, Torres and Balotelli, though Balo also wouldn't have to be registered.

Looking at that, we also need another left back, with Kolarov being mentioned heavily.

Current Manchester City squad:

1 GK Shay Given

26 GK David González

27 GK Joe Hart

37 GK Gunnar Nielsen

2 DF Micah Richards

3 DF Wayne Bridge

4 DF Nedum Onuoha

5 DF Pablo Zabaleta

15 DF Javier Garrido

17 DF Jérôme Boateng

19 DF Joleon Lescott

28 DF Kolo Touré (captain)

30 DF Shaleum Logan

36 DF Javan lVidal

44 DF Dedryck Boyata

45 DF Greg Cunningham

6 MF Michael Johnson

7 MF Stephen Ireland

8 MF Shaun Wright-Phillips

11 MF Adam Johnson

18 MF Gareth Barry

24 MF Patrick Vieira

29 MF Kelvin Etuhu

33 MF Vincent Kompany

34 MF Nigel de Jong

40 MF Vladimír Weiss

48 MF Abdisalam Ibrahim

— MF Yaya Touré

-- MF David Silva

14 FW Roque Santa Cruz

16 FW Jô

20 FW Felipe Caicedo

25 FW Emmanuel Adebayor

32 FW Carlos Tévez

39 FW Craig Bellamy

52 FW Alex Nimely

-- FW Robinho

Fixed the above to reflect the ruleset more. The bolded players are homegrown as they have been playing in England or Wales for 3 seasons before their 21st birthday. The italicised players are 21 or below on 1st August 2010 and don't count towards the 25.

I get that as 27 players to be registered, with 22 possible homegrowns under the regulations.

Considering we'll be shipping players out, we'll be fine.

Oh, and regarding the financial regulations from UEFA. They state that contracts signed before 1st June 2010 are basically written off in the calculation, and even the ones after have until 2018 to get fully sorted out, which I imagine we will be by then.

The FA need to bring in squad caps. Stop the Sugar Daddy'd teams buying up all the talent with their limitless funds.

Say, 26-30 registered players for the season.

Ummm...you know that they've already done that with a squad size of 25?

Post removed. It had nothing to do with Villa or Milner, if you want to talk about City you have your own thread in other football.

thing id like to know is, what is the point of a contract, if its true he wont even talk to us who does he think he is. were aston villa, we employ him, he cant just mug us off like that (assuming its true) fine theres not having loyalty but out of respect you dont do that to the club who technically rescued you from the championship and developed you into an england starter. if thi is true ill think a lot less of him as a man tbh. he has two years left on his contract, about time players were taught to honour them, i couldnt just opt out things im contracted to because i found a better offer. man city are ruining football, along with vulgar amounts of money and big headed players

I pre-empted this about a hundred pages ago.

Yes, James Milner has a contract at Villa. Due to this, we need to give you money so that you will break his contract, which is exactly what a transfer fee is.

Villa can quite easily turn around and reject any offer, he has no buyout clause that I'm aware of. You can reject a £1 billion bid if you like, it's entirely up to Villa.

If Milner goes, it is because Villa have declared an acceptable value for him, which we thought was reasonable. This is why you haven't asked for £80m off of us.

I also find it shallow that City, a club who is bringing in hundreds of millions from outside the game, is ruining football, whereas clubs like Man United and Liverpool who are leveraged up to the hilt and have owners that are bleeding fans dry are somehow the new 'classy clubs'.

I've lost the quoted post now, but I wouldn't worry about what most of the posters think about a deal on the Bluemoon Transfer Forum. Half of them think the Torres deal is done, and the other half spend their lives shouting at them to be more realistic. 'Tis an enchanting place though, it's like internet crack..

Anyway, Milner would definitely get in our team. He'd be ahead of SWP on the right wing, and ahead of Bellamy on the left. The only winger I think he'd be behind is Johnson, purely because he's our next "Great White Hope" so to speak. This is presuming that Silva plays in the centre. If he turns out a bit flimsy for that role, Milner can goes in the centre as a box to box with any combination of Barry/De Jong/Toure next to him.

Stephen Ireland is his own worst enemy at times, but his press is quite bad.

He quit the ROI squad as some of the senior players pinned him down and started pulling out his hair or something, then when he complained about it to management, they told him to stop being so soft and that nobody would be punished.

He did lie about the death of his gran, but it wasn't to get out of international duty, it was because his girlfriend had just had a miscarriage and rang him crying on the phone for him to come home. He didn't really think about what he was doing, and just used the whole "my nan's died" excuse that millions of teenagers have tried to use in the past, though it bit him in the arse in the end.

He has however, posted stupid pictures of himself on Bebo and made some daft comments to his girlfriend on there, which a mate later leaked.

He also rang a moderator on Bluemoon asking for a thread to be pulled, which is a bit daft.

Anyway, all of this seems academic as apparently (I'm not watching it right now) SSN have just said something about Milner and the move been complete. They may have read it off of the back of a newspaper, was anyone else watching?

The Milner situation is stalled, we have rejected their bid and until they get really silly he aint going anywhere but Villa. Milner will negotiate a new deal with Villa in th e next 2 weeks, probably a one or two year extension to his deal and a near doubling of his wages.

Man City will never be able to earn the type of money from turnover that will allow them to pay many more £220,000 a week contracts, they will have to sell in order to allow themselves to even get close to UEFA's turnover rule.

On Ireland? Forget him or any other city player coming to Villa, their wage structure is in a different league to ours and 99% of the other teams in the PL. Most of their fringe players will sit their inflated contracts out in order to get wages close to what they have now, when they leave on bosmans.

With the greatest respect, you don't know what you are talking about. I suggest that you read the actual rules.

"Players under contract before 1 June 2010

If a licensee reports an aggregate break-even deficit that exceeds the

acceptable deviation and it fulfils both conditions described below then this

would be taken into account in a favourable way.

i) It reports a positive trend in the annual break-even results (proving it has

implemented a concrete strategy for future compliance); and

ii) It proves that the aggregate break-even deficit is only due to the annual

break-even deficit of the reporting period ending in 2012 which in turn is

due to contracts with players undertaken prior to 1 June 2010 (for the

avoidance of doubt, all renegotiations on contracts undertaken after such

date would not be taken into account).

This means that a licensee that reports an aggregate break-even deficit that

exceeds the acceptable deviation but that satisfies both conditions described

under i) and ii) above should in principle not be sanctioned."

The acceptable deviation is the maximum aggregate break-even deficit possible

for a club to be deemed in compliance with the break-even requirement as

defined in Article 63.

2 The acceptable deviation is EUR 5 million. However it can exceed this level up

to the following amounts only if such excess is entirely covered by contributions

from equity participants and/or related parties:

a) EUR 45 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons

2013/14 and 2014/15;

EUR 30 million for the monitoring period assessed in the licence seasons

2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18;

c) a lower amount as decided in due course by the UEFA Executive Committee

for the monitoring periods assessed in the following years.

That means that firstly, there's a deviation of 45m gradually heading down to 5m in 8 years time, and secondly, that every single contract signed before this transfer window including the Tevez's and Adebayor's of this world can be written off.

You also fail to consider that we have the third highest attendance in the league, have sold out our seasoncards in record time and are about to expand our stadium. Our turnover has already jumped up and once the gloryhunters start coming in, it will jump some more. Then there's the issue of sponsorship deals which seem to be coming in for obscure things such as "Official Holiday Destination".

The Sheikh and his team of legal beagles aren't stupid and live in a fairyland, they're highly successful businessmen.

I also don't know where you have gotten the Milner information from, but it is different to MM's and to City's.

Can't see De Jong leaving as he's still in our first team, even with Yaya there now.

The Barry thing might have some weight as early in the season he was described as been really inward and quiet in the dressing room, a bit of a loner. Whether or not this has changed since I don't know.

Not sure where the NOTW got those contract details from with Yaya, as neither side really publish these things. It's interesting to note that the Sun (their sister paper) are the ones who declare that Tevez was a £57m signing, when in fact he cost £32m. They seem to have this thing recently where they add up the full value of the contract as well as the fee and announce that as how much we've paid for them. Mind you, considering that our press office doesn't speak to the Sun or NOTW after we sued them last season for printing false stories about us, I'm not surprised that there is a grudge.

Anyway, heard nothing about Arteta but if we do go for him, it would have been because the Milner deal fell through. City have a list of A targets, then B targets, then C targets, etc, as most clubs do when they feel they need a certain type of player. Just as Adebayor was a B target last year after we pulled out of our A target Eto'o. So, if you see a SSN report that we've bid for Arteta, Milner won't be coming as Milner was always spoken about with Silva and Toure as an A target.

I'm not entirely sure why our side thinks it is done, when there's nothing doing from your side. Perhaps the Villa side are no commenting everything so that we can wait until Milner gets back, and do it all in a day, ala Gareth Barry.

Horses for course. He's stronger than Johnson for those games when we need it on the wing. Chelsea at home springs to mind. Perhaps Milner is a direct replacement for SWP?

This is all a bit academic at the moment anyway, as Milner isn't yet a City player, and even we aren't stupid enough to sell before we buy.

Spoke with yours yesterday seems Lescott is going to be your left back and some Benfica centre back is lined up .

Yeah, David Luiz.

I'd be shocked if Lescott played left back for us first choice, simply because he's shit there. Mind you, if Bridge goes down, we do have Luiz, Lescott and Barry who can all play there, as well as Jerome Boateng, so it isn't a major concern.

Anything about Milner from the Villa end yet? Our end seems to think it's a done deal with the club, and the lad will sign for 5 years?

Horses for course. He's stronger than Johnson for those games when we need it on the wing. Chelsea at home springs to mind. Perhaps Milner is a direct replacement for SWP?

This is all a bit academic at the moment anyway, as Milner isn't yet a City player, and even we aren't stupid enough to sell before we buy.

Milner would be a left winger first (we play opposite wingers) and a box to boxer second.

Our box to box midfielders:

Michael Johnson - Permanently injured, unfortunately

Gareth Barry - it's where we used him under Mancini

Stephen Ireland - He's going

So really, we have a guy who has been injured for 3 years, a guy who's going and GazBaz.

Left Wingers at City:

Craig Bellamy - His legs are going, and admits he probably can't handle many games next season

SWP - Possibly going as his contract is running out and he's asking for stupid money.

Milner would provide cover for both positions, and with a 38 game season, and hopefully three long cup runs, there are plenty of games to be played.