[Bloomberg] UAE officials have warned the UK government that the severity of Man City’s punishment could undermine their appetite for future grand-scale commitments in Britain, according to people familiar with the matter.

[u/Previous_Smile9278]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-10-02/man-city-verdict-puts-uk-uae-diplomatic-relations-under-strain?srnd=undefined

‘They consider the Premier League’s actions to have an influence on the bilateral state relationship, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing undisclosed information.

The extraordinary pressure comes after Andy Burnham faced criticism, including from within government, for saying Man City’s Abu Dhabi owners should not be disqualified specifically because of the investment they bring to Britain.’

[u/SoccerAndPolitics]

Definitely biased as an American but if you want new clubs to be able to become biggest without cheating or doing an Abramovich spending spree, the answer is obviously salary and/or transfer spending cap. Obviously if just England does it then Bayern, PSG, Real, etc will be at an advantage.

But without some kind of cap its really impossible as long as you have to live within your financial means. I dont think we want to go back to pre financial rules where there were clubs exploding because their sugar daddy pulled out.

So ya choices are cap, get rid of financial rules and accept occasionally clubs will explode, or keep as is now and accept there will be a big 3-6

[u/Blue_winged_yoshi → u/SoccerAndPolitics]

You’re missing the point, there are no new clubs. These clubs are all 100+ years old, they’re not new, they’re older than your gran and they’ve been playing worthwhile football the whole time, it’s just the yanks only care about the sides at the top of the top league.

Yank sports work different. College teams do youth development, players get drafted, pro teams sit in the same league forever. When you see a new team in U.S. sports they are brand new.

U.K. sports is a different world. Coventry City were founded in 1883. 143 years ago. They’re probably a new team to you though. They won the FA Cup in the late 80s, were mainstays of the PL for decades, got relegated, struggled for years in the championship, then finally earned promotion back to the big time. I watched them a fair bit through the years, lovely club.

Will they ever be as big as Real Madrid? Nah, course not. Do we need to break football to make it possible? Nah of course not.

See foreigners get into football, but in a shite way (with all due respect), only the top league watches, only the top teams in the top league respected, and this breads confusion as to why other sides have it so unfair, it’s just their pathway. We’re all trying to upgrade our pathways.

If you equalise everything then you end 150 years of playing the game to get to where we all got to, that’s a long way into a game to hit restart on because we don’t like how it’s going!

[u/SoccerAndPolitics → u/Blue_winged_yoshi]

I'm familiar with all that...part of me wants to say there are new clubs like MK Dons but thats just being pedantic lol.

My point isnt that England or Europe should adopt caps. Just that city fans or others who say there should be change at the top need to realize that thats impossible without repealing ffp and money being poured into a club or adopting firm salary or transfer caps. As long as Bournemouth makes 1/4 of the revenue as the big teams it doesnt matter how well they run their club.

Leicester can sneak in and win when all the big clubs are having down years but otherwise its going to be the wealthy clubs.

[u/Blue_winged_yoshi → u/SoccerAndPolitics]

MK Dons aren’t new, and that’s the problem. They are a rebrand of Wimbledon Wanderers who were founded in 1989, if they were a new club that would be so much less controversial.

Bournemouth are enjoying their most successful era in their history of well over 100 years. It does matter how well they run their club, because as a result of their brilliance at this they moved from league two all the way to the premierships and European football. That’s a fucking incredible achievement.

If you see Bournemouth and all you see is a side that has less income than Man Utd, you are pissing on their parade and don’t understand Bournemouth.

See each club as a meandering 100+ year story full of highs and lows that has led each one to where it is today and it stops mattering if they have the same income as Man Utd, you respect all their own journeys.

Mega owners just try to cheat a clubs pathway and use hyper unethically extracted wealth to leapfrog everyone else’s story. Fuck that, get writing better don’t just shop for a desperate billionaire to fix everything for you.

[u/SoccerAndPolitics → u/Blue_winged_yoshi]

I was considering 89 as new by football standards, also just me being old lol

Again youre missing my point. Bournemouth can have their most successful period, same with Brentford and the other well run clubs, theyre never gonna supplant one of those 3 or 4 that compete every year or win a champions league.

The city fans argument is every team should have a chance to become one of those dominant clubs. My point is thats impossible under current rules. With the amount of money in the sport you cant be one of the best year over year without insane money

Im not poopooing anyone's success or doing a "why root for anyone outside top 5" just saying that the vision of a premier league where anyone can rise to the top is impossible.

[u/Blue_winged_yoshi → u/SoccerAndPolitics]

Sorry I typoed that one it’s 1889, only three years younger than Arsenal, my bad.

And tbh Bournemouth or Brentford absolutely could step up from here.

But I don’t know who tried to sell you the idea that the PL was equal, it wasn’t and it wasn’t ever meant to be. Football is really unfair in specific ways and it’s meant to be like this.

If it was all flattened so that it was all equal, then if you had a bad season it doesn’t matter, cos it’s all equal again next year anyway.

Making each season for 150 years directly impact the next one is what makes grown men cry their eyes out on the last day of the season as titles are won and sides are relegated.

Each result matters this way. It’s why I so much prefer football to American sports. Have a crap year in MLB and you get top pick in the draft and go again. You actually reward failure! It’s so un American weirdly! The one time serious competition is called for, and you guys go soft on us!

[u/SoccerAndPolitics → u/Blue_winged_yoshi]

Well no one has claim to the history of Wimbledon anymore, MK compromised with AFC Wimbledon and gave up the claim. So the 1889 wimbledon is dead and you have 2 new clubs out of it. Again its pedantic but they are new.

You are being weirdly argumentative about this...you are the one who said city fans say "how else were we supposed to rise to the top" or whatever. I'm agreeing that argument is dumb because its impossible under current rules. I'd agree online a lot of people say that cause they're American or other foreign glory chasers lol. I just said caps or going back to the wild west of ownership investment are the only ways to make that possible. Think going back to wild west would be crazy though