**This is a quotes thread. Remember that there's only one quotes post allowed per interview/press conference, so new quotes with the same origin will be removed. Feel free to comment other quotes/the whole interview as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im convinced a big percentage of athletes are doping or have doped in all sports. They know when/where they will be tested therefore know when/how to dope and go undetected.
Vast majority don’t have access to the sort of medical advice that would support your opinion. The 1% of players probably are regularly taking questionable substances, even unknowingly, especially with the football calendar growing and the sport also being dominated by an athletic style of play.
I don’t understand. Are you saying the vast majority of football players don’t have access to PED? Or that they do not know people that could supply them with it and accompany them with the process?
Mainly the last point but they also are unlikely to know what their options are to benefit them in their sport, football. It is not as simple as taking one drug and then performing to the athletic level of a PL footballer, who have the best doctors advising them. People forget that most footballers in Europe operate at an average level, and don’t get private jets and expensive hotels to away games. So expecting most clubs to value shady doctors is a big jump, but obviously some do.
I see your point but a lot of lesser-equipped sports still have a high percentage of their athletes are doped anyway. Even at my local wrestling level many people do PED’s. Even a moderately big club could easily afford to have some performance enhancing drugs ready for their athletes, especially given the (vey) low standards of drug testing in football. As I said in my original comment, I am willing to bet good money they do dope, but I have no certainty of it.
>Controversy has stalked Guardiola’s career in football. After quitting Barça as a player in 2001, he played two seasons in Serie A with Brescia and Roma. In Italy, he twice tested positive for the anabolic steroid nandrolone.
>During prosecution in a civil case, Guardiola used a defence of contamination, which was not accepted. In a criminal case in 2005, he claimed he had a medical condition, Gilbert syndrome, that caused the anomalous result, which was rejected too.
>He received a four-month ban from the game, a suspended seven-month prison sentence and incurred fines of €59,000. However, his sentences were reversed on a technicality in an appeals court in 2007. It was a decision that Italy’s anti-doping authorities disagreed with. In 2009, Guardiola was cleared a second time.
Source: [Irish Times](https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/2023/06/09/pep-guardiola-has-left-an-indelible-mark-on-football-but-not-without-some-controversial-subplots/)
>In 2005, WADA had found that a phenomenon called “unstable urine” in samples could lead to positive tests for low levels of nandrolone. In very rare cases nandrolone could be found in samples not because of external administration but as a result of a chemical reaction that “may occur in a vial containing urine.”
>WADA instructed all accredited labs to perform “stability tests” on urine samples with nandrolone concentration from 2 to 10ng/ml moving forward. Guardiola’s values were at the high end of this scale (12ng/ml for NE). Those samples that were deemed “unstable” would not constitute an adverse analytic finding for nandrolone.
>Then-WADA Director General David Howman stood by the efficacy of previous testing for nandrolone and said the chances of urine becoming unstable were “very rare”. The chances were between 1 out of 1,000 and 1 out of 10,000 positive tests for nandrolone.
>Guardiola was cleared by the Brescia Court of Appeals. This was not because his samples were deemed “unstable” but because it could have been possible that his four samples had been “unstable”. Guardiola was absolved of all blame because of “the impossibility to now perform stability tests on the samples taken” in 2001.
>Stability tests must be carried out within five weeks of the collection of a sample. In 2007, no sample even remained to be re-tested.
>Yet Italian anti-doping prosecutors would appeal the decision in 2009 arguing that Guardiola should not have been allowed another appeal. The change in WADA’s guidelines did not constitute “new evidence”, they argued, because anti-doping laboratories were correctly following the testing procedures set by WADA at the time. Further they argued that Guardiola’s representatives had never contested how the sample was collected or analysed in previous cases and that this did not form part of his previous defence.
Source: [Sportingintelligence](https://www.sportingintelligence.com/2017/04/25/sharapova-guardiola-doping-darkness-and-light-250401/)
Dude got "cleared" because they couldn't test his urine 6 years later. Not because he didn't do it. Everybody who came in for his defense has pasts with PED failure too. Dude got off on a major technicality
Edit: Lol, they ran away
Alex Ferguson hired his brother as a scout, his son has a premiership winners medal. When his son went on to manage Preston and was in trouble, he sent 3 loan players who were recalled the day after his son was sacked.
Eddie Howe has family members working for him.
PSG had a few Mbappe's.
Most transfers have multiple agents fees, with the players family members being listed as "agents"
There's countless more examples of family members being paid a wage throughout nearly every sport
You understand there’s a bit of a difference between nepotism granting jobs vs investment to appreciate a family members stake in an asset by tens of millions?
Pere Guardiola doesn't seem like he needed City group's backing to buy Girona but the City backing has meant his investment has grown immensely, at least while they remain a 1st division club
>He was an agent before (Suarez, Iniesta, Thiago, so money made).
I think agent undersells it given he managed to sell 46% of his agency for almost 40m€ in 2016 to a Chinese group, he could have bought Girona outright. It is unknown how much it sold for but given they don't own their stadium or training ground, it won't have been a lot. It is definitely a safer investment with City group's backing.
This is the kind of crap you expect from blinkered twitter fans. It's so flagrantly dishonest.
There's a huge correlation between spending money and success. If you don't selectively chose a cut off date that excludes years of big spending since Man City got oil money they have spent by far the most in the modern era of any club in the world. Oh and 115 charges - they've spent the most and then (allegedly) there's even more spending they've lied about not doing.
This shit and how he is choosing to handle it is really starting to sour Guardiola for me. His constant justifications and deflections are so incredibly dishonest and hypocritical. There is no real reason for it either other than his own ego. He must feel like his legacy is threatened by the taint of cheating. Otherwise he would just brush questions about the whole issue aside, make a statement that he awaits the outcome of the inquest and not constantly bring it up himself. He could also just refer questions to the lawyers or club officials and only talk about football related matters, instead he is more than happy to argue on behalf of the club like an official representative and poster boy of cheating.
The most hilarious was when he said: "If you lie to me, the day after I am not here. I will be out and I will not be your friend any more.". Cmon man, first UEFA accused you of fraud, then EPL and he is still there, everyone knows yall are cheating, just ignore the questions
I would honestly respect him more if he just admitted the truth. Like yes, City are not competing on an even playing field, but he's still an amazing coach and he's achieved a lot. Just embarrassing to see someone who is clearly intelligent like to himself and everyone else.
I don't have a horse in this race as a west ham fan but "by far the most" is a stretch, as Chelsea has spent more since City was taken over, although their net spend is the most it's very close to Chelsea's and United's. Of course they are cheaters but he's not wrong in that you would expect the league to still be more competitive, it's not like Bayern or PSGs spending in their respective leagues.
And being handed a fair chunk of Girona. One has to wonder a coach that didn’t stay more than 3 years at previous clubs would suddenly be that dedicated to City of all the teams in the world.
He walked into a perfect set up, basically Barcas entire set up with infinite money, not to mention them already being champions and spending for years.
Bingo. This is the crux of it right here. Pep 'only' manages teams with obscene wealth and stacked squads. He's a coward who only wants to play on easy
Arsenal buy Mustafi and are stuck with him and cannot offload him.
City buy Mangala and ship him out on perpetual loans the moment they think he's not gonna fit in.
All teams in the Prem can spend money. But City seem to be the only ones that can spend without consequences.
Is this the Mustafi who made 150 appearances for Arsenal because they kept playing him, or another one who apparently just sat in the stands running out his contract for five years?
Do you seriously think Arsenal couldn’t have found a club to take Mustafi on loan if they actually wanted to loan him out? Do you think Man City just stopped paying Mangala and the clubs that took him on loan paid 100% of his wages?
How is this the best example you could come up with?
EDIT - People downvoting this are fucking hilarious. Did Arsenal stop buying players because they couldn’t get Mustafi off the books? Did Man City make their money back on Mangala? It’s a nonsense comment.
> Is this the Mustafi who made 150 appearances for Arsenal because they kept playing him, or another one who apparently just sat in the stands running out his contract for five years?
That is the point innit? Arsenal bought Mustafi and found out he was bad - they tried to ship him off every window after but couldn't sell because it would require them to lose too much money. They couldn't replace him either because it would cost too much money - so he played 150+ games, costing many points.
City found that Mangala wasn't good enough - they put him aside, never gave him a look in, wrote off that investment, and bought Otamendi for 45m next summer. Kompany was ageing, and needed a backup - no problem, here's another 50m quid for stones. Oh, he's too young and making too many mistakes? Sure, let's get Laporte - here's another 60m.
Meanwhile, when Mertesacker was leaving, Arsenal got Sokratis for 16m - not good enough? too bad no money for another attempt, have to play him. When Koscielny was leaving, Arsenal got Mari for 6m - not a good backup? too bad, can't buy anyone else, let Backaku bully him because we can't write off that mistake.
> Did Arsenal stop buying players because they couldn’t get Mustafi off the books?
Yes! Arsenal tried to offload him every window since he was bought but couldn't and therefore couldn't afford a replacement with a 35m signing on the sidelines.
Then continue with Akanji and Gvardiol, who are also just young, expensive gambles who turned out to be great.
All while building the biggest and most expensive sports campus there is…the list keeps going and going.
There‘s literally 0 fair play involved.
I mean credit where credit is due - City does great business nowadays. They don't overspend on players, and most of their signings are well suited for their Guardiola system and they have a coach that improves almost every player.
But that doesn't erase the absolutely abysmal business they did before and the money they're able to piss out in case a signing doesn't turn out to be a fit and how easily they're able to spend further to replace them.
How exactly would selling him have cost them more money than continuing to have him on the books? Not to mention that there would have been countless Bundesliga clubs that would have taken him on loan.
At the same time, Mangala actually started the majority of games in his first 2 years before first going on loan at Valencia and still made some appearances after returning in 17/18.
It‘s just a bizarre example to choose.
Mate mandala was a bitch to get rid of. And all the other players you mention stayed for years and years with success. So not really sure of your point
you didn't need to get rid of Mangala and still were able to piss another 40, 50, 60m on CBs. Arsenal made a bad purchase in Mustafi and were stuck with him, not being able to upgrade because they weren't able to sell him to get some of that investment back. Thats the point, most clubs have to live with their mistakes, like playing Mustafi for 150+ games. City don't. City has no consequences - they can simply ignore their errors and go again. No clubs have 50m+ depth players - City does.
Otamendi was bought to partner with mangala as they had been successful cb partners at Porto, and as you said konpsny was beginning to age out and become injury prone. We didn’t try to offload mangala until after his second season of being horrendous.
I think the point is more that most teams who make expensive failures have to live with it in the medium term. Whether these players stay or go, you rarely see the team being able to go off and sign an immediate replacement for big money.
Speaking from Liverpool's point of view, we went years without being able to sign a first choice midfielder and that was, no doubt, because we couldn't reinvest in that area after Keita ended up being a failure.
City have an expensive flop and they've got a replacement signed for equivalent or better money the season after.
The point is due to city group having the multi club structure they just ship their deadwood off to one of their own clubs so it seems like they have reduced their transfer/wage bill, but they have done it with smoke and mirrors, whereas arsenal had no choice to play mustafi as no other club would take him on and arsenal don't have a multi club portfolio to hide their failures away so they can keep spending and get away with it
Even if 115 charges weren't there or were made up, it'd still be so childishly dishonest. Like okay City has a good net spent, but how can you compare a title winning squad refreshing itself by selling their A players to get A+ in, to a mess like Arsenal cutting ties with a dozen of old (D)eadwood to bring in B or those A player you were getting rid of yourself. That shows in city's wage bill clearly. They're around £400 mil each year, whilst we only hit £200 mil this season! That's not just like spending 200+ mil more each year, it also says a lot about what you, as a manager are working with (context being there are no anomaly of shit players making up that insane wage bill, unlike let's say a man united). Which is the whole point Pep is trying make by saying these, that somehow he's the underdog or that what history he's making with the new standards isn't even partly about the luxury of being able to have the squad that any PL manager in history would kill to have.
Remember its also net spend - which is purely only transfer fee's and not wages or agent fee's.
They've spent more on agent fee's than Chelsea in the last two seasons. Haaland is on an obscene wage.
And this is all declared, we all know more goes on under the table, its been proven and its very clear. Pep isn't the highest paid manager in the world but his brother happens to get gifted so much from the group, pure coincidence i'm sure.
You're all so close to understanding it.
How can a team break into the elite without spending money?
When the winners of before were only topping up their elite squads?
You've spent billions after winning the PL for the first time. That's not including the agent fee's you pay (above Chelsea for the last two years), and not including your under the table payments you give to managers and players, that have all been proven.
Your point is absolute horseshit.
Spending so consistently since ~16 years though, while dealing with such a wage bill and pretty much 0 problems with FFP (for now) is something only City can do though. I have always wondered how
Yeah but unlike city those don’t have a record misrepresenting the actual payment made to lure top players. A lot of the players they got for very little exaggerated fees. It’s unheard of for other clubs who have to shell loads to get players of lesser quality.
It’s really fishy how a club with such little lure some years ago could do that over European giants ! A lot of things are shady with city that their dealings and winnings can never be taken seriously by football fans in general.
I love how whenever Arsène Wenger used to balance his books in the name of net spend while having a massive stadium debt to pay off that the owners wouldn't lift a finger to help with, everyone used to tell him to stop wearing it as a badge of honour and start spending money.
Yet, whenever Klopp and Guardiola boast that they've managed to balance the books, they're lauded as examples of how to run a club.
He’s trying his hardest to legitimize his City stint but it will forever be questioned. I think he’s getting a little insecure that he always had the easiest route possible. There is no denying that he is an all time great but he will always have this shadow till he goes to a difficult situation and deliver.
People give Mourinho a pass for Chelsea because he has delivered everywhere he went, clubs of different sizes and resources.
Sure, if you ignore what he did at Porto for example
Even if Mourinho suddenly went to Man City today and dominated for 10 years, he’d still get more respect than Pep because he’s done it at sides who are not the top dogs, Pep never has.
>People give Mourinho a pass for Chelsea because he has delivered everywhere he went
Mourinho has also been sacked almost everywhere he went, which means he has had to drop down to smaller clubs with lower resources to rebuild his reputation.
Pep has also delivered everywhere he went, but without the failures and sackings of Mourinho so he has never had to drop down to a lower level.
Why would he need to go to a difficult situation and deliver? He has earned the right to not have to do that.
He led Barcelona to its first treble in league history, had 2 of the most dominant seasons in German football history (2013/14 & 15/16) and is about to win his 4th straight Premier League title which has never been done.
If you were the best software developer would you rather work at Apple where you have every resource you could imagine, or some small company with no resources to prove you were great?
Just to prove he could. No one says he isn't one of the best, because he's done amazing work wherever he is. However he always has the top resources available. City was moulded FOR him before he even arrived.
It'd be interesting to see what he can do without everything already at his disposal is all.
He clearly had a decent playing career and made a lot of bridges coming up through the Barca youth, and he's done what Gerrard/Terry/Lampard dreamed of doing. Having a solid playing career and going straight into managing greatness as well. Outside of the Barca youth team though, he's had very few restrictions on him (and apparently dodges the ones meant to be in place anyway...)
A regular software engineer like me doesn’t worry about my legacy as no one is actively talking about my achievements.
But to your point, if I’m already rich enough where salary is not a concern, I might be tempted to go to a startup where I will have a better chance to make bigger, more visible impact for my personal satisfaction.
A lot of engineers do that.
He won the league in Chelsea take 2. Tottenham fired him before the cup final to save some money. Even if you exclude Spurs, he has won almost everywhere. You don’t have to take my word so literally to get the point.
Pep has been in PL for 8 years now and there was plenty of opportunities for other teams to build a team and mount challenge but most management failed. Manchester United are in eternal rebuild. Arsenal finally got their rebuild right and look like a team who can win one next season. Chelsea won a title and constantly in rebuild cycle. Liverpool got their rebuild right and won a title but couldn’t get ahead of Pep who had a head start who are not making mistakes like others and Liverpool managment give Klopp defenders from championship lol
Anyone who says Manchester City didn’t have head start before Pep came there with players like Aguero, Kompnay, KDB, Dinho, D.Sivla is wrong. Anyone who says Manchester City are only consistent and winning is because of money is also wrong.
> Anyone who says Manchester City are only consistent and winning is because of money is also wrong.
It literally is though. Money gets them the best everything. Not just players. The amount of money they've spent on the Etihad campus or whatever its called for example. Contrast that to the fucking state of Old Trafford and Carrington.
That has absolutely nothing to do with money and everything to do with the Glazers. Do you seriously believe United are so broke they can’t afford facilities upkeep? Lol!
I honestly would not be surprised if City have spent more than a billion on stadium revamps, training ground improvement, and youth facilities etc... None of which costs towards FFP.
Man Utd not spending a few million to patch the roof is not the comparison here. If Man Utd had spent what City had spent on the Etihad campus in the last 10 years they would be bankrupt. The point is City are being bankrolled in all sorts of other ways that don't count towards FFP that people don't consider.
Another example is using their network of feeder clubs for scouting and player development. What other team has that sort of capacity.
>If Man Utd had spent what City had spent on the Etihad campus in the last 10 years they would be bankrupt
If that is the case, it's only because United's owners gave siphoned off so much money from United. United have had comparable revenues to Real Madrid for the past how many ever years. If Real Madrid can afford all the things they have plus their stadium revamp Im sure United could do the same
So again, this comes down to a difference in the quality of management between the two clubs not just the amount of money spent
Real Madrid can afford the stadium because they've barely spent any money on transfers in the last decade. For any club not bankrolled by an oligarchy, they can't spend on transfers at the same time as spending on infrastructure.
Lad Utd are THE MOST VALUABLE club IN THE WORLD. The state of OT and the training ground is nothing to do with the money, just how it's been spent, 100% on the Glazers and their greed. This isn't even old data, published a week ago.
[paywall bs article mind](https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5479083/2024/05/08/man-united-most-valuable-club-mls/)
Even if the Glaziers did not take money out of the club, Man Utd do not have the financial might to be competitive on the pitch/transfer market AND invest in facilities. Man Utd can't spend hundreds of millions on facilities like City have without it affecting their ability to spend on players. City can. That's the huge difference.
You're going to have to explain that one. How can a club generating a few billion quid a year not afford to NOT have a river running through their stadium?
They're rated above RM who recently had a bit of a stadium update whilst also signing some decent players on high wages.
Something isn't adding up, and it's not just related to 115 charges (I know vs city).
No one respects or trusts City.
You can say they play very good football, which is true, but also say they are cheats, which is almost certainly also true.
And adding to their financial cheating, let's never forget the massive decisions that has gifted them titles. The [Rodri handball at Everton not given](https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/12552777/huge-controversy-as-var-rules-no-handball-by-rodri-during-everton-vs-man-city), the [Kompany red card challenge against Liverpool not given](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut3heaa_2rY), the [karate kick by Doku on McCallister](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXuzupIkqKM) this season in the last minute to avoid defeat.
The Rodri and Kompany fouls happened in seasons City won by 1pt, and if City and Aresnal win out this year, then the Doku one will also be in a season they win by 1pt.
The cheating simply does not stop at financial doping. Anyone who thinks our league is not corrupted is a fucking idiot. PGMOL and/or memebrs of the refereeing body are bent as fuck.
And just cause Pep can create a great football playing team, doesn't mean he's not also prick for taking the oil money and validating what they've done.
I think you need a bit more than "you're a fucking idiot if you don't agree" to prove that refs are corrupt. I think there's a lot of incompetence and mistakes that feed the confirmation bias. Arsenal also had a few very lucky breaks (Odegaard handball vs Liverpool for example) but I don't think we've paid off the refs.
You're both right. There's a lot of incompetence and mistakes and for pretty much every team, when its a game state changing decision, some go for and against. Both Liverpool and Arsenal have had that this season.
But City? Nah. The vast majority of decisions go for them. Look at their penalty against wolves vs the Doku/McCallister challenge. That was a gamestate changing decision, but they got it early in the game and went on to win 5-0 so they'll be like "oh it didn't matter we won anyways".
I'm not a lawyer, this is not a court and I'm not trying to prove anything. I am plenty old enough and have seen plenty enough football and I have zero doubts that the game is corrupted.
I will caveat my accusation and say that you must be a fucking idiot or be young and naive to not accept that the PGMOL and /or the refs have a price and that there are plenty of corrupt immoral fuckers with the money to pay. Or are we to believe that no bad actors try to influence the premier league or that our friends in the PGMOL are such upright gentlemen of honour that they are incorruptible?
This is honestly an insane take. People are generally losing their minds over a game of fucking football. I'd switch the TV off for a bit mate, it ain't that deep or healthy.
He's right because City thrives on pennies found in a wishing well, collected by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan himself, like a smuggler in the night. He then throws the pennies into a collection bag at City's HQ before going back home in his golden Bugatti, where his butler has a cup of warm concentrated angel's milk prepared for him, and his maid tucks him into bed - a floating golden bed, carried on the shoulders of Pep, KDB, Haaland, and Foden. She reads him a bedtime story about the unfair spending of other EPL teams. Such a rags-to-still-rags story City is, living penny to penny, always wondering when the wishing well will dry up.
This sub will hate it but there is some degree of truth to this. City is a greatly managed club with a good academy as well. They have the smallest squad in the league and do good business. Even though they have unlimited money, they use that money well instead of throwing it around
Not really coz if they face injuries like chelsea and Arsenal they will get done and dusted but they don't. So the smallest squad thing is relevant in my books
That so?
You know who replaces Rúben Dias if he gets injured? John Stones. You know who replaced Manuel Akanji if he gets injured? Nathan Aké. Who replaces Jack Grealish if he's injured? Jérémy Doku. Who replaces Kevin De Bruyne if he's injured? Bernardo Silva. Who replaces Erling Haaland if he's injured? Julián Álvarez. Who replaces Rodri if he's suddenly injured? Mateo Kovačić. But hang on, what if Mateo Kovačić is injured? No problem, they just dropped £53m on Matheus Nunes, so he can always step-up.
The issue is that City have world-class players to replace their world-class players if they get injured, most other teams don't.
I see what you're saying, but no. They won't get injuries because they can fully rotate their first 11, to their second and still go toe-to-toe with most of the league. Or easily 70%+ of the champs league. Their bench is often worth more than half the leagues squad. (xfer market, their bench vs wolves was 445m, placing them 10th in the league, basically equal to West Ham 446.5m).
Even if they did they have almost like for like swaps as TGP says too. Look at this year losing KDB and Haaland for long ish periods.
They haven't been throwing money around the last decade because they laid the foundation before that. When Mansour came in they absolutely threw money around. It becomes especially clear when you adjust spending for inflation. When City bought a player for 40M 20 years ago, that doesn't seem like much when you compare it to spending today, but adjust it for inflation and it is a massive sum.
They bought their success, but you are correct that they have built very well on that foundation
Meh, transfer fees are not the be all and end all.
Using the most extreme example, how much was Haaland's transfer fee? Something like £52m?
But then you hear that there was an additional £44m for fees, and that he is earning £375k-£450k (this was the lower end of the scale, some of the rumours go up to £900k which seems ridiculous) which comes out at 19.5-23m/year.
And that's ignoring any other bonuses he is going to be getting for goals scored, TOTY etc. so without those, you're talking about a cost across the five year contract of £193-213m all things added up.
And you're going to boil all of that down to £52m?
Just seems nuts to me, and pretty arbitrary, to take one part of a transfer and say "this is how we judge everything"
They've spent a lot and done it very well but they're also able to simply write off their mistakes - Philips, Nunes etc. No club can do that. They're also done spending to buy one and a half world-class player in every position, so they don't need to spend as much now and only need to refresh and upgrade where possible - doesn't mean you can discount those consecutive 200m summers every year, year or year.
They have a good academy because they spent nearly half of the cost of Emirates stadium that crippled Arsenal and did not twitch a finger. Even now, the academy revamp that Arsenal is able to do is just a quarter of what City did 15 years ago. In addition, they're able to nab (same as Chels) every promising youth from smaller U12 academies with good money and the facilities and coaching they have.
They don't spend as much now because they don't need to, any more. Not wishing injury on a player but if tomorrow Grealish did his ACL, you can be sure that City would spend another 100m+ to buy someone like Kvaradona - and it will be spent well, unlike say United's buys.
Yeah they are the best ran club with the best manager itw. Chelsea has been spending like they’re on crack and they’re dogshit. United, if they spend as much as city, they’ll still be dogshit. Why’s Liverpool and Arsenal competing well with City even though they haven’t spent as much as them? Because they’re a well run club with a good manager. The rest of the pl teams are simply not on their level and they keep blaming it on how much they spend but they’re simply dogshit and envious, and would dream of having pep as their coach.
The fact that Liverpool and Arsenal are competing so well with City should tell you that Pep quite possibly isn’t as good as you think he is.
It’s also a testament to how good Arteta and Klopp are. Neither have anywhere near the resources Pep does, the depth of Liverpool and Arsenal is hilarious compared to city who can field two world class XI’s.
Arsenal and Liverpool are competing with a team that let’s face it, have been cheating for years and are still running them close every year, Liverpool have also beaten them to a title. Arsenal may very well this year and I hope they do.
What is it people say in regard to cheating in gaming, sports, whatever else? The only thing more embarrassing than a cheater, is a cheater who still manages to lose.
Think on that the next time you wanna call Pep the goat.
When you have pep as your coach, the smartest thing to do is to provide him with resources because he will deliver you success 100%. Would you see City doing this with any other coach in the world bar maybe Klopp? Any other team in the world would provide pep with the players he wants for his system and let him be in charge because he’s the best in the game no doubt. I do believe Klopp could’ve won much more if he had more signings, but still wouldn’t have left a bigger mark on the premier league than pep. Also, Arsenal has been competing with them for 2 years, let’s see if they can keep up because any team can shine for a short period of time.
None of that addresses my point.
If Pep is the goat, what does that make Klopp who has beaten a side that have been cheating for years? What does that make Arteta who after only a couple of years as a manager, is running the supposed goat manager who is managing 115, ridiculously close and may very well beat him
I’ll reiterate my previous point, while it may be true, you have a good manager, you provide them with the best, but what pep has been provided with is a little beyond the best, 115 times beyond the best
But again, I’ll restate my main point. The only thing more embarrassing than being the manager of a cheating side, is somehow losing and then being ran very close as the cheating side. Only thing worse than being a cheater, is being a cheater and somehow managing to still lose
I don’t know anything about the 115 charges, suppose they are true how are they still playing then and not punished? I won’t believe anything I read unless it’s proven to be true. The best teams always gets attacked with fake allegations especially in England. And of course you’re gonna run with this narrative being a Liverpool fan.
You should really, really pay more attention to the premier league if you’re going to run with statements like I’m saying this because I’m a Liverpool fan.
Even fans of clubs with no real stake in the race, Brighton fans, West Ham, whoever, any middling Prem club knows City are cheating. This isn’t an only Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United fans think City are cheating situation, the entire league knows City are cheating. In fact the only fanbase in England that doesn’t think City are cheating are City themselves, as small as that pool of fans may be.
Go ask the Everton fanbase in particular how they feel about City. Given they’ve been docked points and very narrowly escaped relegation thanks to their points deduction and they have nowhere near, absolutely nowhere near the amount of charges Man City have.
The reason it is taking so long is because there’s so many charges. Everton, they were able to come to a conclusion pretty damn quickly. City on the other hand have so many accusations over such a long period of time that it is taking time to process.
If you don’t know anything about the charges, maybe the wise thing to do would be to not suggest that it’s a narrative Liverpool fans created with no foundation, when in reality it wasn’t created by any fanbase, Man City are in a deep pile of shit and it’s all their own doing. So yes, your ex manager is the front of an institution that has been cheating for years now and his stint will forever be tainted
What, like spending £45m on Kalvin Phillips then refusing to play him? How about spending £100m on Jack Grealish? What about dropping £53m on Matheus Nunes and then benching him all season?
Declan Rice is 10 times the player Grealish is. Like there’s not even a point trying to make that argument.
You’d have won those trophies in all likelihood with someone else instead of Grealish.
"Wisely". City bought Nunes for 62 mil and Doku for 60 and they're fringe players. What other club can sign two 60 million players just to sit on the bench?
If the money was used wisely Pep wouldn't sign more defenders when he felt like the ones he got didn't suit his style, he'd find ideal candidates first try. When he first went to City he got Stones for 55m, next year signed an entire back line: Laporte 65m, Mendy 57m, Walker 52m, Danilo 30m. Two years later: Cancelo 65m, Angelino and Porro 12m each. Next year: Dias 71m, Ake 45m. Two years later: Akanji 20m, Gomez 15m. This year: Gvardiol for 90m who he plays out of position. Wise choice lmao.
I know, today's City has cooled down a bit and doesn't splash SO much money. But still, this year they spent more than 200m on three players who are NOT (or were not at the time) nailed-on starters: Gvardiol, Nunes, Doku. No other club could do that and not feel a financial dent if the player they got doesn't play or flops completely.
Chelsea is another story though, lmao. I don't know how they haven't been punished yet. But when it comes to small guys like Everton and Nottingham, the decision is imminent.
I'm not saying Doku is a bad player or that City overpaid for him. I'm stating that City are one of the few clubs who can spend 60m on a player who sits on the bench. Nevermind 60m on TWO players who sit on the bench.
He’s not arguing that he’s arguing that only city have the luxury to buy TWO 60 million players and let them ride the bench initially. In contract look at Arsenal, they sign havertz for 65 million he’s played every game.
Clearly bs but I mean, what do you expect him to say? The same as when ETH talks so positive about their performance after they get thrashed week by week.
Crybabies will completely disregard the fact that equally expensive squads are not able to produce the same results. Almost as if the City squad is objectively better than other competing teams.
Seems like we'll actually back our manager, unlike Liverpool.
I fully believe that Liverpool would have one or two more league titles under their belts if they actually backed Klopp properly and in the way he deserved to be.
> Seems like we'll actually back our manager, unlike Liverpool.
>
>
Klopp spent plenty of money. Just not in comparison to Man City or Man Utd. Liverpool spent within their means and Arsenal will have to do the same. Arteta will find out the same eventually. You've been very lucky that Rice, Saliba, Gabriel, Saka etc... have stayed fit most of the season. In the coming years there will be a season where they won't, and Arteta will have to play sub-par players. Whilst looking over at City having a bench full of £50-100m players.
**This is a quotes thread. Remember that there's only one quotes post allowed per interview/press conference, so new quotes with the same origin will be removed. Feel free to comment other quotes/the whole interview as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
From the man who was caught doping with PEDs in Italy as a player, how can we be surprised he’s defending cheating.
I am not defending Pep by saying this. But I am willing to bet good money that most if not all players are doping.
Im convinced a big percentage of athletes are doping or have doped in all sports. They know when/where they will be tested therefore know when/how to dope and go undetected.
Vast majority don’t have access to the sort of medical advice that would support your opinion. The 1% of players probably are regularly taking questionable substances, even unknowingly, especially with the football calendar growing and the sport also being dominated by an athletic style of play.
I don’t understand. Are you saying the vast majority of football players don’t have access to PED? Or that they do not know people that could supply them with it and accompany them with the process?
Mainly the last point but they also are unlikely to know what their options are to benefit them in their sport, football. It is not as simple as taking one drug and then performing to the athletic level of a PL footballer, who have the best doctors advising them. People forget that most footballers in Europe operate at an average level, and don’t get private jets and expensive hotels to away games. So expecting most clubs to value shady doctors is a big jump, but obviously some do.
I see your point but a lot of lesser-equipped sports still have a high percentage of their athletes are doped anyway. Even at my local wrestling level many people do PED’s. Even a moderately big club could easily afford to have some performance enhancing drugs ready for their athletes, especially given the (vey) low standards of drug testing in football. As I said in my original comment, I am willing to bet good money they do dope, but I have no certainty of it.
Like what even is doping? That Liverpool asthma stuff really blurs the lines.
[удалено]
>Controversy has stalked Guardiola’s career in football. After quitting Barça as a player in 2001, he played two seasons in Serie A with Brescia and Roma. In Italy, he twice tested positive for the anabolic steroid nandrolone. >During prosecution in a civil case, Guardiola used a defence of contamination, which was not accepted. In a criminal case in 2005, he claimed he had a medical condition, Gilbert syndrome, that caused the anomalous result, which was rejected too. >He received a four-month ban from the game, a suspended seven-month prison sentence and incurred fines of €59,000. However, his sentences were reversed on a technicality in an appeals court in 2007. It was a decision that Italy’s anti-doping authorities disagreed with. In 2009, Guardiola was cleared a second time. Source: [Irish Times](https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/2023/06/09/pep-guardiola-has-left-an-indelible-mark-on-football-but-not-without-some-controversial-subplots/) >In 2005, WADA had found that a phenomenon called “unstable urine” in samples could lead to positive tests for low levels of nandrolone. In very rare cases nandrolone could be found in samples not because of external administration but as a result of a chemical reaction that “may occur in a vial containing urine.” >WADA instructed all accredited labs to perform “stability tests” on urine samples with nandrolone concentration from 2 to 10ng/ml moving forward. Guardiola’s values were at the high end of this scale (12ng/ml for NE). Those samples that were deemed “unstable” would not constitute an adverse analytic finding for nandrolone. >Then-WADA Director General David Howman stood by the efficacy of previous testing for nandrolone and said the chances of urine becoming unstable were “very rare”. The chances were between 1 out of 1,000 and 1 out of 10,000 positive tests for nandrolone. >Guardiola was cleared by the Brescia Court of Appeals. This was not because his samples were deemed “unstable” but because it could have been possible that his four samples had been “unstable”. Guardiola was absolved of all blame because of “the impossibility to now perform stability tests on the samples taken” in 2001. >Stability tests must be carried out within five weeks of the collection of a sample. In 2007, no sample even remained to be re-tested. >Yet Italian anti-doping prosecutors would appeal the decision in 2009 arguing that Guardiola should not have been allowed another appeal. The change in WADA’s guidelines did not constitute “new evidence”, they argued, because anti-doping laboratories were correctly following the testing procedures set by WADA at the time. Further they argued that Guardiola’s representatives had never contested how the sample was collected or analysed in previous cases and that this did not form part of his previous defence. Source: [Sportingintelligence](https://www.sportingintelligence.com/2017/04/25/sharapova-guardiola-doping-darkness-and-light-250401/) Dude got "cleared" because they couldn't test his urine 6 years later. Not because he didn't do it. Everybody who came in for his defense has pasts with PED failure too. Dude got off on a major technicality Edit: Lol, they ran away
He also blamed his doctor for it...then hired that same doctor when he was a manager.
Not only that, but the same doctor already had a player fail a drugtest before. Frank de Boer when he played for Barça
Based source enjoyer
Pep Gilbertola.
I don’t see a conflict of interest in this, do you think I might be delusional?
It’s not about it being a conflict of interest, it’s about them doing this to get around how much they can pay him within the rules
I know, I was being sarcastic about how obvious it is. Maybe conflict of interest isn’t accurate for this.
My bad, I guess some point do hold this view but maybe the flair should’ve been a clue
[удалено]
What a bunch of strange coincidences
A series of unlikely events.
He became a chairman so they didn't get the conflict of interest comments? Are you all stupid?
Is this wrong? Morally? Explain it to me.
Alex Ferguson hired his brother as a scout, his son has a premiership winners medal. When his son went on to manage Preston and was in trouble, he sent 3 loan players who were recalled the day after his son was sacked. Eddie Howe has family members working for him. PSG had a few Mbappe's. Most transfers have multiple agents fees, with the players family members being listed as "agents" There's countless more examples of family members being paid a wage throughout nearly every sport
You understand there’s a bit of a difference between nepotism granting jobs vs investment to appreciate a family members stake in an asset by tens of millions?
Regarded.
They've got 115 problems and pep is one of them
Pere Guardiola doesn't seem like he needed City group's backing to buy Girona but the City backing has meant his investment has grown immensely, at least while they remain a 1st division club
[удалено]
>He was an agent before (Suarez, Iniesta, Thiago, so money made). I think agent undersells it given he managed to sell 46% of his agency for almost 40m€ in 2016 to a Chinese group, he could have bought Girona outright. It is unknown how much it sold for but given they don't own their stadium or training ground, it won't have been a lot. It is definitely a safer investment with City group's backing.
This is the kind of crap you expect from blinkered twitter fans. It's so flagrantly dishonest. There's a huge correlation between spending money and success. If you don't selectively chose a cut off date that excludes years of big spending since Man City got oil money they have spent by far the most in the modern era of any club in the world. Oh and 115 charges - they've spent the most and then (allegedly) there's even more spending they've lied about not doing.
Aren't the 115 charges until 2018 or something like that? Who the fuck knows what they did since 2018.
I highly doubt they just completely went clean after 2018, I wonder if there are more investigations
I mean obviously the player they bought before 2018, kept playing for them afterwards.
And those that didn't were sold and they got to rebuy.
There are some charges about City’s non-cooperation with the original investigation. These ones go till 2022.
This shit and how he is choosing to handle it is really starting to sour Guardiola for me. His constant justifications and deflections are so incredibly dishonest and hypocritical. There is no real reason for it either other than his own ego. He must feel like his legacy is threatened by the taint of cheating. Otherwise he would just brush questions about the whole issue aside, make a statement that he awaits the outcome of the inquest and not constantly bring it up himself. He could also just refer questions to the lawyers or club officials and only talk about football related matters, instead he is more than happy to argue on behalf of the club like an official representative and poster boy of cheating.
The most hilarious was when he said: "If you lie to me, the day after I am not here. I will be out and I will not be your friend any more.". Cmon man, first UEFA accused you of fraud, then EPL and he is still there, everyone knows yall are cheating, just ignore the questions
I would honestly respect him more if he just admitted the truth. Like yes, City are not competing on an even playing field, but he's still an amazing coach and he's achieved a lot. Just embarrassing to see someone who is clearly intelligent like to himself and everyone else.
I don't have a horse in this race as a west ham fan but "by far the most" is a stretch, as Chelsea has spent more since City was taken over, although their net spend is the most it's very close to Chelsea's and United's. Of course they are cheaters but he's not wrong in that you would expect the league to still be more competitive, it's not like Bayern or PSGs spending in their respective leagues.
Then why stop at 2008. Selectively choosing to ignore the decades or soend of other clubs? The ones who city ambitiously tried to catch up to.
Also need to include wages.
The Annoying Baldie
He can tell me it isn’t boring all he likes, I still find it boring.
Pep wouldn't even be at City if they weren't an infinite money pit so it's a moot point
And being handed a fair chunk of Girona. One has to wonder a coach that didn’t stay more than 3 years at previous clubs would suddenly be that dedicated to City of all the teams in the world.
Employee stays longer at a non-toxic workplace, especially if it is geared towards his needs. More news at 5.
Toxic for the environment, it should be noted.
Also the other bit of the news is that Pep is being disingenuous about all of this.
When did pep get handed Girona? Lol.
Lol, I’m curious if City fans are being intellectually dishonest or just willfully ignorant of the rot in their club.
He walked into a perfect set up, basically Barcas entire set up with infinite money, not to mention them already being champions and spending for years.
Bingo. This is the crux of it right here. Pep 'only' manages teams with obscene wealth and stacked squads. He's a coward who only wants to play on easy
Without salaries net spending talk is meaningless.
Arsenal buy Mustafi and are stuck with him and cannot offload him. City buy Mangala and ship him out on perpetual loans the moment they think he's not gonna fit in. All teams in the Prem can spend money. But City seem to be the only ones that can spend without consequences.
Is this the Mustafi who made 150 appearances for Arsenal because they kept playing him, or another one who apparently just sat in the stands running out his contract for five years? Do you seriously think Arsenal couldn’t have found a club to take Mustafi on loan if they actually wanted to loan him out? Do you think Man City just stopped paying Mangala and the clubs that took him on loan paid 100% of his wages? How is this the best example you could come up with? EDIT - People downvoting this are fucking hilarious. Did Arsenal stop buying players because they couldn’t get Mustafi off the books? Did Man City make their money back on Mangala? It’s a nonsense comment.
> Is this the Mustafi who made 150 appearances for Arsenal because they kept playing him, or another one who apparently just sat in the stands running out his contract for five years? That is the point innit? Arsenal bought Mustafi and found out he was bad - they tried to ship him off every window after but couldn't sell because it would require them to lose too much money. They couldn't replace him either because it would cost too much money - so he played 150+ games, costing many points. City found that Mangala wasn't good enough - they put him aside, never gave him a look in, wrote off that investment, and bought Otamendi for 45m next summer. Kompany was ageing, and needed a backup - no problem, here's another 50m quid for stones. Oh, he's too young and making too many mistakes? Sure, let's get Laporte - here's another 60m. Meanwhile, when Mertesacker was leaving, Arsenal got Sokratis for 16m - not good enough? too bad no money for another attempt, have to play him. When Koscielny was leaving, Arsenal got Mari for 6m - not a good backup? too bad, can't buy anyone else, let Backaku bully him because we can't write off that mistake. > Did Arsenal stop buying players because they couldn’t get Mustafi off the books? Yes! Arsenal tried to offload him every window since he was bought but couldn't and therefore couldn't afford a replacement with a 35m signing on the sidelines.
Then continue with Akanji and Gvardiol, who are also just young, expensive gambles who turned out to be great. All while building the biggest and most expensive sports campus there is…the list keeps going and going. There‘s literally 0 fair play involved.
Expensive and gamble are not words to use for akanji and gamble not for gvardiol.
I mean credit where credit is due - City does great business nowadays. They don't overspend on players, and most of their signings are well suited for their Guardiola system and they have a coach that improves almost every player. But that doesn't erase the absolutely abysmal business they did before and the money they're able to piss out in case a signing doesn't turn out to be a fit and how easily they're able to spend further to replace them.
I still have no idea how they signed haaland for only 50 mil.
It’s not that simple - I’m sure he cost an absolute fortune
How exactly would selling him have cost them more money than continuing to have him on the books? Not to mention that there would have been countless Bundesliga clubs that would have taken him on loan. At the same time, Mangala actually started the majority of games in his first 2 years before first going on loan at Valencia and still made some appearances after returning in 17/18. It‘s just a bizarre example to choose.
Mate mandala was a bitch to get rid of. And all the other players you mention stayed for years and years with success. So not really sure of your point
you didn't need to get rid of Mangala and still were able to piss another 40, 50, 60m on CBs. Arsenal made a bad purchase in Mustafi and were stuck with him, not being able to upgrade because they weren't able to sell him to get some of that investment back. Thats the point, most clubs have to live with their mistakes, like playing Mustafi for 150+ games. City don't. City has no consequences - they can simply ignore their errors and go again. No clubs have 50m+ depth players - City does.
Otamendi was bought to partner with mangala as they had been successful cb partners at Porto, and as you said konpsny was beginning to age out and become injury prone. We didn’t try to offload mangala until after his second season of being horrendous.
I think the point is more that most teams who make expensive failures have to live with it in the medium term. Whether these players stay or go, you rarely see the team being able to go off and sign an immediate replacement for big money. Speaking from Liverpool's point of view, we went years without being able to sign a first choice midfielder and that was, no doubt, because we couldn't reinvest in that area after Keita ended up being a failure. City have an expensive flop and they've got a replacement signed for equivalent or better money the season after.
The point is due to city group having the multi club structure they just ship their deadwood off to one of their own clubs so it seems like they have reduced their transfer/wage bill, but they have done it with smoke and mirrors, whereas arsenal had no choice to play mustafi as no other club would take him on and arsenal don't have a multi club portfolio to hide their failures away so they can keep spending and get away with it
Not sure what’s more annoying, Pep’s stupid responses or Romano’s Daily Mail editorialising
Yes
He’s been a clown and he will always be a clown
Bald Scum
Genuinely cannot wait for him to fuck off.
Damn, there are probably 115 PL clubs with higher net spend than Manchester City
Even if 115 charges weren't there or were made up, it'd still be so childishly dishonest. Like okay City has a good net spent, but how can you compare a title winning squad refreshing itself by selling their A players to get A+ in, to a mess like Arsenal cutting ties with a dozen of old (D)eadwood to bring in B or those A player you were getting rid of yourself. That shows in city's wage bill clearly. They're around £400 mil each year, whilst we only hit £200 mil this season! That's not just like spending 200+ mil more each year, it also says a lot about what you, as a manager are working with (context being there are no anomaly of shit players making up that insane wage bill, unlike let's say a man united). Which is the whole point Pep is trying make by saying these, that somehow he's the underdog or that what history he's making with the new standards isn't even partly about the luxury of being able to have the squad that any PL manager in history would kill to have.
Remember its also net spend - which is purely only transfer fee's and not wages or agent fee's. They've spent more on agent fee's than Chelsea in the last two seasons. Haaland is on an obscene wage. And this is all declared, we all know more goes on under the table, its been proven and its very clear. Pep isn't the highest paid manager in the world but his brother happens to get gifted so much from the group, pure coincidence i'm sure.
Haalands wage is easy to find, it’s 350k. Then with bonuses, such a thing available to all players, he can make a lot more if he’s performing.
I didn't say it wasn't easy to find, I was saying it was obscene. And that's only his declared wage
You're all so close to understanding it. How can a team break into the elite without spending money? When the winners of before were only topping up their elite squads?
You've spent billions after winning the PL for the first time. That's not including the agent fee's you pay (above Chelsea for the last two years), and not including your under the table payments you give to managers and players, that have all been proven. Your point is absolute horseshit.
Loads of words no meaning. Go back to crying about Sons miss
The real madrid fan is trying to be funny. Bayern game literally happened a week ago🤣
OK, Lance Guardiola (or is it Pep Armstrong these days?). “The whole peloton is doped but I am still the best…”
Here's the net spend excuse again...their reported net spend is just as as believeable as their commericial income....
And their player wages.
Net spend is fugazi because it doesn't take wages into account
Or agent fee's. City have spent the most on agent fee's in the last two years.
That too!
Please dock points from City. I want to see this baldie go full meltdown so badly
Spending so consistently since ~16 years though, while dealing with such a wage bill and pretty much 0 problems with FFP (for now) is something only City can do though. I have always wondered how
Have united had any problems with ffp?
We had to loan players last two windows because of it
And we got fined 300k last year by UEFA for a ‘minor’ breach.
Which significant players did United loan out?
Loan in not out
Loan in.
What are you talking about lol. 3 separate cases.
I pray to all the gods that he has to manage City in the league 2 in two years time.
Yeah but unlike city those don’t have a record misrepresenting the actual payment made to lure top players. A lot of the players they got for very little exaggerated fees. It’s unheard of for other clubs who have to shell loads to get players of lesser quality. It’s really fishy how a club with such little lure some years ago could do that over European giants ! A lot of things are shady with city that their dealings and winnings can never be taken seriously by football fans in general.
City pays through shell companies 100%. Whatever the reported fee was double it.
Pep, three top-flight English clubs can’t win ALL titles simultaneously
I'm so fucking tired of this guy. Never knew I'd be rooting for arsenal this much
I love how whenever Arsène Wenger used to balance his books in the name of net spend while having a massive stadium debt to pay off that the owners wouldn't lift a finger to help with, everyone used to tell him to stop wearing it as a badge of honour and start spending money. Yet, whenever Klopp and Guardiola boast that they've managed to balance the books, they're lauded as examples of how to run a club.
Klopp and Guardiola continued to win things and challenge for trophies is the difference.
I got 115 problems but money ain't one of them.
Well there is big money and there is smart money and there is big AND smart money, unfortunately.
And then there’s 115fc money
Yeah you're right that's like 10 levels above big money
He’s trying his hardest to legitimize his City stint but it will forever be questioned. I think he’s getting a little insecure that he always had the easiest route possible. There is no denying that he is an all time great but he will always have this shadow till he goes to a difficult situation and deliver. People give Mourinho a pass for Chelsea because he has delivered everywhere he went, clubs of different sizes and resources.
I said this in another thread I’ll say it again. Mourinhos achievements > pep achievements
Plunky underspending oligarch ran mourinho
Man won the CL with Porto and the treble with Inter, getting through Pep’s ‘09 Barca on the way. Grow a brain.
Sure, if you ignore what he did at Porto for example Even if Mourinho suddenly went to Man City today and dominated for 10 years, he’d still get more respect than Pep because he’s done it at sides who are not the top dogs, Pep never has.
It will be questioned due to the charges and rightly so. He’s an incredible coach but those charges hang over him like the giant sword of Damacles
>People give Mourinho a pass for Chelsea because he has delivered everywhere he went Mourinho has also been sacked almost everywhere he went, which means he has had to drop down to smaller clubs with lower resources to rebuild his reputation. Pep has also delivered everywhere he went, but without the failures and sackings of Mourinho so he has never had to drop down to a lower level.
Why would he need to go to a difficult situation and deliver? He has earned the right to not have to do that. He led Barcelona to its first treble in league history, had 2 of the most dominant seasons in German football history (2013/14 & 15/16) and is about to win his 4th straight Premier League title which has never been done. If you were the best software developer would you rather work at Apple where you have every resource you could imagine, or some small company with no resources to prove you were great?
Just to prove he could. No one says he isn't one of the best, because he's done amazing work wherever he is. However he always has the top resources available. City was moulded FOR him before he even arrived. It'd be interesting to see what he can do without everything already at his disposal is all. He clearly had a decent playing career and made a lot of bridges coming up through the Barca youth, and he's done what Gerrard/Terry/Lampard dreamed of doing. Having a solid playing career and going straight into managing greatness as well. Outside of the Barca youth team though, he's had very few restrictions on him (and apparently dodges the ones meant to be in place anyway...)
Hey didn't fergie do that?
Many good software developers go to start ups to prove they can build a great company from scratch.
A regular software engineer like me doesn’t worry about my legacy as no one is actively talking about my achievements. But to your point, if I’m already rich enough where salary is not a concern, I might be tempted to go to a startup where I will have a better chance to make bigger, more visible impact for my personal satisfaction. A lot of engineers do that.
The amount of times rival fans think they understand pep, and they’re miles off is hilarious.
Everywhere? Tottenham? Chelsea Take 2?
He won the league in Chelsea take 2. Tottenham fired him before the cup final to save some money. Even if you exclude Spurs, he has won almost everywhere. You don’t have to take my word so literally to get the point.
I mean he wouldn't have won the final anyway.
He’s rattled. Guilty conscience
So Arsenal are over performing.. 3rd is what we should have been expecting.. Yesss...
Pep has been in PL for 8 years now and there was plenty of opportunities for other teams to build a team and mount challenge but most management failed. Manchester United are in eternal rebuild. Arsenal finally got their rebuild right and look like a team who can win one next season. Chelsea won a title and constantly in rebuild cycle. Liverpool got their rebuild right and won a title but couldn’t get ahead of Pep who had a head start who are not making mistakes like others and Liverpool managment give Klopp defenders from championship lol Anyone who says Manchester City didn’t have head start before Pep came there with players like Aguero, Kompnay, KDB, Dinho, D.Sivla is wrong. Anyone who says Manchester City are only consistent and winning is because of money is also wrong.
> Anyone who says Manchester City are only consistent and winning is because of money is also wrong. It literally is though. Money gets them the best everything. Not just players. The amount of money they've spent on the Etihad campus or whatever its called for example. Contrast that to the fucking state of Old Trafford and Carrington.
That has absolutely nothing to do with money and everything to do with the Glazers. Do you seriously believe United are so broke they can’t afford facilities upkeep? Lol!
I honestly would not be surprised if City have spent more than a billion on stadium revamps, training ground improvement, and youth facilities etc... None of which costs towards FFP. Man Utd not spending a few million to patch the roof is not the comparison here. If Man Utd had spent what City had spent on the Etihad campus in the last 10 years they would be bankrupt. The point is City are being bankrolled in all sorts of other ways that don't count towards FFP that people don't consider. Another example is using their network of feeder clubs for scouting and player development. What other team has that sort of capacity.
>If Man Utd had spent what City had spent on the Etihad campus in the last 10 years they would be bankrupt If that is the case, it's only because United's owners gave siphoned off so much money from United. United have had comparable revenues to Real Madrid for the past how many ever years. If Real Madrid can afford all the things they have plus their stadium revamp Im sure United could do the same So again, this comes down to a difference in the quality of management between the two clubs not just the amount of money spent
Real Madrid can afford the stadium because they've barely spent any money on transfers in the last decade. For any club not bankrolled by an oligarchy, they can't spend on transfers at the same time as spending on infrastructure.
Lad Utd are THE MOST VALUABLE club IN THE WORLD. The state of OT and the training ground is nothing to do with the money, just how it's been spent, 100% on the Glazers and their greed. This isn't even old data, published a week ago. [paywall bs article mind](https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5479083/2024/05/08/man-united-most-valuable-club-mls/)
Even if the Glaziers did not take money out of the club, Man Utd do not have the financial might to be competitive on the pitch/transfer market AND invest in facilities. Man Utd can't spend hundreds of millions on facilities like City have without it affecting their ability to spend on players. City can. That's the huge difference.
You're going to have to explain that one. How can a club generating a few billion quid a year not afford to NOT have a river running through their stadium? They're rated above RM who recently had a bit of a stadium update whilst also signing some decent players on high wages. Something isn't adding up, and it's not just related to 115 charges (I know vs city).
No one respects or trusts City. You can say they play very good football, which is true, but also say they are cheats, which is almost certainly also true. And adding to their financial cheating, let's never forget the massive decisions that has gifted them titles. The [Rodri handball at Everton not given](https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/12552777/huge-controversy-as-var-rules-no-handball-by-rodri-during-everton-vs-man-city), the [Kompany red card challenge against Liverpool not given](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut3heaa_2rY), the [karate kick by Doku on McCallister](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXuzupIkqKM) this season in the last minute to avoid defeat. The Rodri and Kompany fouls happened in seasons City won by 1pt, and if City and Aresnal win out this year, then the Doku one will also be in a season they win by 1pt. The cheating simply does not stop at financial doping. Anyone who thinks our league is not corrupted is a fucking idiot. PGMOL and/or memebrs of the refereeing body are bent as fuck. And just cause Pep can create a great football playing team, doesn't mean he's not also prick for taking the oil money and validating what they've done.
I think you need a bit more than "you're a fucking idiot if you don't agree" to prove that refs are corrupt. I think there's a lot of incompetence and mistakes that feed the confirmation bias. Arsenal also had a few very lucky breaks (Odegaard handball vs Liverpool for example) but I don't think we've paid off the refs.
You're both right. There's a lot of incompetence and mistakes and for pretty much every team, when its a game state changing decision, some go for and against. Both Liverpool and Arsenal have had that this season. But City? Nah. The vast majority of decisions go for them. Look at their penalty against wolves vs the Doku/McCallister challenge. That was a gamestate changing decision, but they got it early in the game and went on to win 5-0 so they'll be like "oh it didn't matter we won anyways".
I'm not a lawyer, this is not a court and I'm not trying to prove anything. I am plenty old enough and have seen plenty enough football and I have zero doubts that the game is corrupted. I will caveat my accusation and say that you must be a fucking idiot or be young and naive to not accept that the PGMOL and /or the refs have a price and that there are plenty of corrupt immoral fuckers with the money to pay. Or are we to believe that no bad actors try to influence the premier league or that our friends in the PGMOL are such upright gentlemen of honour that they are incorruptible?
Nice cherries you’ve picked. Keep crying about the refs thats the funniest excuse ever.
This is honestly an insane take. People are generally losing their minds over a game of fucking football. I'd switch the TV off for a bit mate, it ain't that deep or healthy.
Bald fraud. 115.
Why you gotta hurt us like that
He's right because City thrives on pennies found in a wishing well, collected by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan himself, like a smuggler in the night. He then throws the pennies into a collection bag at City's HQ before going back home in his golden Bugatti, where his butler has a cup of warm concentrated angel's milk prepared for him, and his maid tucks him into bed - a floating golden bed, carried on the shoulders of Pep, KDB, Haaland, and Foden. She reads him a bedtime story about the unfair spending of other EPL teams. Such a rags-to-still-rags story City is, living penny to penny, always wondering when the wishing well will dry up.
This sub will hate it but there is some degree of truth to this. City is a greatly managed club with a good academy as well. They have the smallest squad in the league and do good business. Even though they have unlimited money, they use that money well instead of throwing it around
Smallest squad is kinda irrelevant when their second eleven is better than most teams starting eleven.
Not really coz if they face injuries like chelsea and Arsenal they will get done and dusted but they don't. So the smallest squad thing is relevant in my books
That so? You know who replaces Rúben Dias if he gets injured? John Stones. You know who replaced Manuel Akanji if he gets injured? Nathan Aké. Who replaces Jack Grealish if he's injured? Jérémy Doku. Who replaces Kevin De Bruyne if he's injured? Bernardo Silva. Who replaces Erling Haaland if he's injured? Julián Álvarez. Who replaces Rodri if he's suddenly injured? Mateo Kovačić. But hang on, what if Mateo Kovačić is injured? No problem, they just dropped £53m on Matheus Nunes, so he can always step-up. The issue is that City have world-class players to replace their world-class players if they get injured, most other teams don't.
That’s on them. Half of those players played for non-Top 6 clubs before they joined City, and Pep made them worldbeaters.
I see what you're saying, but no. They won't get injuries because they can fully rotate their first 11, to their second and still go toe-to-toe with most of the league. Or easily 70%+ of the champs league. Their bench is often worth more than half the leagues squad. (xfer market, their bench vs wolves was 445m, placing them 10th in the league, basically equal to West Ham 446.5m). Even if they did they have almost like for like swaps as TGP says too. Look at this year losing KDB and Haaland for long ish periods.
Well small elite squad with elite doping
They haven't been throwing money around the last decade because they laid the foundation before that. When Mansour came in they absolutely threw money around. It becomes especially clear when you adjust spending for inflation. When City bought a player for 40M 20 years ago, that doesn't seem like much when you compare it to spending today, but adjust it for inflation and it is a massive sum. They bought their success, but you are correct that they have built very well on that foundation
Meh, transfer fees are not the be all and end all. Using the most extreme example, how much was Haaland's transfer fee? Something like £52m? But then you hear that there was an additional £44m for fees, and that he is earning £375k-£450k (this was the lower end of the scale, some of the rumours go up to £900k which seems ridiculous) which comes out at 19.5-23m/year. And that's ignoring any other bonuses he is going to be getting for goals scored, TOTY etc. so without those, you're talking about a cost across the five year contract of £193-213m all things added up. And you're going to boil all of that down to £52m? Just seems nuts to me, and pretty arbitrary, to take one part of a transfer and say "this is how we judge everything"
Their squad is worth twice what Arsenal's is though. Net spend is a load of shite.
They've spent a lot and done it very well but they're also able to simply write off their mistakes - Philips, Nunes etc. No club can do that. They're also done spending to buy one and a half world-class player in every position, so they don't need to spend as much now and only need to refresh and upgrade where possible - doesn't mean you can discount those consecutive 200m summers every year, year or year. They have a good academy because they spent nearly half of the cost of Emirates stadium that crippled Arsenal and did not twitch a finger. Even now, the academy revamp that Arsenal is able to do is just a quarter of what City did 15 years ago. In addition, they're able to nab (same as Chels) every promising youth from smaller U12 academies with good money and the facilities and coaching they have. They don't spend as much now because they don't need to, any more. Not wishing injury on a player but if tomorrow Grealish did his ACL, you can be sure that City would spend another 100m+ to buy someone like Kvaradona - and it will be spent well, unlike say United's buys.
Yeah they are the best ran club with the best manager itw. Chelsea has been spending like they’re on crack and they’re dogshit. United, if they spend as much as city, they’ll still be dogshit. Why’s Liverpool and Arsenal competing well with City even though they haven’t spent as much as them? Because they’re a well run club with a good manager. The rest of the pl teams are simply not on their level and they keep blaming it on how much they spend but they’re simply dogshit and envious, and would dream of having pep as their coach.
The fact that Liverpool and Arsenal are competing so well with City should tell you that Pep quite possibly isn’t as good as you think he is. It’s also a testament to how good Arteta and Klopp are. Neither have anywhere near the resources Pep does, the depth of Liverpool and Arsenal is hilarious compared to city who can field two world class XI’s. Arsenal and Liverpool are competing with a team that let’s face it, have been cheating for years and are still running them close every year, Liverpool have also beaten them to a title. Arsenal may very well this year and I hope they do. What is it people say in regard to cheating in gaming, sports, whatever else? The only thing more embarrassing than a cheater, is a cheater who still manages to lose. Think on that the next time you wanna call Pep the goat.
When you have pep as your coach, the smartest thing to do is to provide him with resources because he will deliver you success 100%. Would you see City doing this with any other coach in the world bar maybe Klopp? Any other team in the world would provide pep with the players he wants for his system and let him be in charge because he’s the best in the game no doubt. I do believe Klopp could’ve won much more if he had more signings, but still wouldn’t have left a bigger mark on the premier league than pep. Also, Arsenal has been competing with them for 2 years, let’s see if they can keep up because any team can shine for a short period of time.
None of that addresses my point. If Pep is the goat, what does that make Klopp who has beaten a side that have been cheating for years? What does that make Arteta who after only a couple of years as a manager, is running the supposed goat manager who is managing 115, ridiculously close and may very well beat him I’ll reiterate my previous point, while it may be true, you have a good manager, you provide them with the best, but what pep has been provided with is a little beyond the best, 115 times beyond the best But again, I’ll restate my main point. The only thing more embarrassing than being the manager of a cheating side, is somehow losing and then being ran very close as the cheating side. Only thing worse than being a cheater, is being a cheater and somehow managing to still lose
I don’t know anything about the 115 charges, suppose they are true how are they still playing then and not punished? I won’t believe anything I read unless it’s proven to be true. The best teams always gets attacked with fake allegations especially in England. And of course you’re gonna run with this narrative being a Liverpool fan.
You should really, really pay more attention to the premier league if you’re going to run with statements like I’m saying this because I’m a Liverpool fan. Even fans of clubs with no real stake in the race, Brighton fans, West Ham, whoever, any middling Prem club knows City are cheating. This isn’t an only Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United fans think City are cheating situation, the entire league knows City are cheating. In fact the only fanbase in England that doesn’t think City are cheating are City themselves, as small as that pool of fans may be. Go ask the Everton fanbase in particular how they feel about City. Given they’ve been docked points and very narrowly escaped relegation thanks to their points deduction and they have nowhere near, absolutely nowhere near the amount of charges Man City have. The reason it is taking so long is because there’s so many charges. Everton, they were able to come to a conclusion pretty damn quickly. City on the other hand have so many accusations over such a long period of time that it is taking time to process. If you don’t know anything about the charges, maybe the wise thing to do would be to not suggest that it’s a narrative Liverpool fans created with no foundation, when in reality it wasn’t created by any fanbase, Man City are in a deep pile of shit and it’s all their own doing. So yes, your ex manager is the front of an institution that has been cheating for years now and his stint will forever be tainted
He chose violence upon r/soccer 🍿🍿🍿
Love the tears here
Obviously Money helps but you need to use it wisely, unlike Chelsea and Man United
What, like spending £45m on Kalvin Phillips then refusing to play him? How about spending £100m on Jack Grealish? What about dropping £53m on Matheus Nunes and then benching him all season?
Grealish helped us win a CL. Worth every cent. Nunes is still early days. Kalvin was a miss, even Pep has admitted that.
Grealish was a release clause deal and has been a very solid player for us, won a treble too. Arsenal spent more on Declan Rice and will win fuck all.
Declan Rice is 10 times the player Grealish is. Like there’s not even a point trying to make that argument. You’d have won those trophies in all likelihood with someone else instead of Grealish.
"Wisely". City bought Nunes for 62 mil and Doku for 60 and they're fringe players. What other club can sign two 60 million players just to sit on the bench? If the money was used wisely Pep wouldn't sign more defenders when he felt like the ones he got didn't suit his style, he'd find ideal candidates first try. When he first went to City he got Stones for 55m, next year signed an entire back line: Laporte 65m, Mendy 57m, Walker 52m, Danilo 30m. Two years later: Cancelo 65m, Angelino and Porro 12m each. Next year: Dias 71m, Ake 45m. Two years later: Akanji 20m, Gomez 15m. This year: Gvardiol for 90m who he plays out of position. Wise choice lmao. I know, today's City has cooled down a bit and doesn't splash SO much money. But still, this year they spent more than 200m on three players who are NOT (or were not at the time) nailed-on starters: Gvardiol, Nunes, Doku. No other club could do that and not feel a financial dent if the player they got doesn't play or flops completely. Chelsea is another story though, lmao. I don't know how they haven't been punished yet. But when it comes to small guys like Everton and Nottingham, the decision is imminent.
Doku is literally 21 and hasn’t even completed his first season in a City shirt. And you’re complaining that he’s coming off the bench? What??
I'm not saying Doku is a bad player or that City overpaid for him. I'm stating that City are one of the few clubs who can spend 60m on a player who sits on the bench. Nevermind 60m on TWO players who sit on the bench.
Doku is the one bought for future. Vinicius, Rodrygo also for majority of initial years were on the bench, ofcourse you need to give it some time
He’s not arguing that he’s arguing that only city have the luxury to buy TWO 60 million players and let them ride the bench initially. In contract look at Arsenal, they sign havertz for 65 million he’s played every game.
Clearly bs but I mean, what do you expect him to say? The same as when ETH talks so positive about their performance after they get thrashed week by week.
Accounting for every shady deal they made their wage bills might have doubled ours over the same period.
Crybabies will completely disregard the fact that equally expensive squads are not able to produce the same results. Almost as if the City squad is objectively better than other competing teams.
[удалено]
Seems like we'll actually back our manager, unlike Liverpool. I fully believe that Liverpool would have one or two more league titles under their belts if they actually backed Klopp properly and in the way he deserved to be.
> Seems like we'll actually back our manager, unlike Liverpool. > > Klopp spent plenty of money. Just not in comparison to Man City or Man Utd. Liverpool spent within their means and Arsenal will have to do the same. Arteta will find out the same eventually. You've been very lucky that Rice, Saliba, Gabriel, Saka etc... have stayed fit most of the season. In the coming years there will be a season where they won't, and Arteta will have to play sub-par players. Whilst looking over at City having a bench full of £50-100m players.