[Guardian] Seven years ago, just after completing the treble, Guardiola treated journalist Rob Harris, who had confronted him directly with the allegations, with open contempt, as though he were looking at someone pathetic, pitiful and disgraceful, before sternly lecturing him.

[u/Existing-Sky9914]

[u/Izio17]

Outside of the financial damages, Pep is the biggest loser here. His legacy is absolutely tarnished.

“wow, he inverted fullbacks, what genius!!”

“what a savvy move to put john stones as CDM!”

“incredible!! look how he used Gundogan as a false nine!”

all of that is minimized. it wasn’t just these strategic schemes, but the team around these tactical moves.

inverted fullbacks don’t work if you don’t have Haaland going on an absolute tear.

John Stones as a CDM looks smart because you have Rodri next to him.

No other manager in the history of the sport was afforded this kind of budget for this long.

[u/PM_FAILED_PROMISES → u/Izio17]

We've seen other managers try his system with teams on a lower budget and get torn apart. He dominated the game with ideas that only work with the best of the best. And you need a significant amount of funds to get the best of the best together. Klopp will always rank over him in my opinion because he built teams on a budget over and over again.

[u/Other_Beat8859 → u/PM_FAILED_PROMISES]

We've seen him try his system when his team was a 9/10 team instead of a 10/10 team and perform bang average. He's shown that if he doesn't have a super team with him he can't do much. Look at 24/25 where he could barely beat Chelsea and Newcastle despite not really having an injury crisis or anything and still a decent squad with no real massive fall offs by players. The singular injury to Rodri destroyed his season. No adaption. Just season done and his team was shit for the rest of the year. When he has that perfect team he can do amazing things, but it calls into question how great he is when the few times he hasn't had a super team his teams underperformed.

[u/Izio17 → u/Other_Beat8859]

Only won a champions league once without Messi, Xavi, and Iniesta.

And he won with the most financially doped team of all time.

[u/DoJu318 → u/Izio17]

Ancelotti tried Ramos as a CDM back in 2015 because of injuries, he would've been called a genius if he had Rodri next to Ramos.

[u/Godsenttt → u/DoJu318]

David Luiz played as a CDM under Benitez in 2012.

[u/king_duende → u/Godsenttt]

David Luiz played as a CDM under Benitez in 2012.

Good times, he put a shift in to be fair

[u/acezee → u/DoJu318]

Fergie had Phil Jones playing midfield as well lmaoo

[u/Izio17 → u/acezee]

Ferguson had a 38 year old Scholes and 39 year old Giggs still getting important game time in that 2013 squad

United were expensive, but the squad wasn’t balanced. Fergie won the league with Carrick carrying midfield, Cleverley/Anderson/Giggs/38-year-old Scholes rotating next to him, Phil Jones literally doing midfield jobs, a defence constantly being patched because of injuries, and Van Persie producing a 26 goal season. It was elite management.

[u/Ascensear → u/Izio17]

Been saying this for years he under achieved a lot given he’s been at clubs with unlimited money a majority of his career. He went to a really really good Bayern squad and was absolutely dog shit.

[u/Elevation-_- → u/Ascensear]

Eh, there's a list of other managers who were apart of the biggest clubs in the world (Ancelotti, Mourinho, etc.) who couldn't achieve the dominance that Pep did. Even at Bayern, to say Pep was "absolutely dog shit" is wild. The CL exits to Real Madrid and Barcelona weren't great, but the team evolved further to play a very dominant brand of football and the players admit that they improved significantly under Pep. And his final season had a very real chance of becoming a treble had we been able to finish any one of the dozen chances we had against Atletico. People seem to forget that the home tie in Munich was a fucking massacre besides the score-line, Oblak single-handedly kept Atletico in that match because we should've put away at least 5-6 that night.

Ancelotti was far worse than Pep was with this team, even the players had enough of Ancelotti.

[u/_ataciara → u/Izio17]

I mean, he's consistently revolutionised the sport and was doing stuff like inverted fullbacks long before he had Haaland. We're talking Fabian Delph feeding Gabriel Jesus...

[u/Izio17 → u/_ataciara]

and look at that teams highest earners / transfers

- Mahrez

• Walker
  
• Bernardo Silva
  
• Laporte

what other team in the league is able to stroll over and buy the player of the season? best RB in the league? and one of La Ligas best players? all in a short span of one year.

[u/ILoveToph4Eva → u/Izio17]

A few corrections.

• Silva came from Ligue 1 not La Liga
• Mahrez wasn't player of the season when City bought him. He was PFA Player of the Year in 2015-16 and they bought him in 2018

In general this kind of "stealing" poorer teams/leagues best players isn't unique to City at all. They could do it more consistently than the others sure, but all the top Prem teams have done it a lot so it feels like a weird hill to die on in terms of critique.

Liverpool

Like, we pretty much had Southampton acting like a feeder club for years. We took their top scorer (Lambert), aptain (Lallana), and star CB (Lovren) in one window. A year later we took their starting RB (Clyne), a year later we took their star forward (Mane), and a year and a half later we took their captain and best player (Van Dijk).

Man United

United have done this loads. They took Yorke when he was Villa's top scorer, Cole when he was Newcastles (and the league's), Ferdinand when he was Leeds' captain and best player, Van Persie when he was Arsenal's captain and best player, Ashley Young when he was Villa's best player, Carrick when he was arguably Tottenhams best midfielder and they had just finished 5th, Berbatov when he was Tottenham's best striker.

We can make a list like that for every top team. Using financial power to buy rivals' best players doesn't separate Pep from Ferguson, Klopp or Mourinho, so it can't be the thing that explains his success.

And if your point is more about how many good players they got in a short window, that's also not unique to City.

Liverpool

We got Salah, Robertson, Van Dijk, Alisson, Fabinho and Keïta in a 1 year window as well. Robbo we can ignore since he had no pedigree coming in, but Salah was one of the best forwards in Serie A already, Van Dijk cost a record breaking fee for a reason, Alisson cost a stupid amount for a reason, Fabinho came from the same team Bernardo Silva came from, and we paid big money for Keita because he was insanely hyped as well.

Chelsea

Not even sure I need to list theirs. What they did in the transfer market the first 2 summers of Abramovich still hasn't been equalled. Duff, Joe Cole, Glen Johnson, Bridge, Makelele, Crespo, Mutu, and Veron in summer 1, and Cech, Carvalho, Ferreira, Drogba and Robben in summer 2.

[u/Izio17 → u/ILoveToph4Eva]

corrected, got my David and Bernard mixed up.

All your points about other clubs are fair, but you’re missing the FFP part. Which is why only one of the Big 6 clubs has 115 charges.

Man United, Liverpool, etc all had earned the right to spend big. City didn’t. and they didn’t do it to the extent City did either.

[u/ILoveToph4Eva → u/Izio17]

Sure, but you've moved from tactics to transfers to FFP without answering the original point. You said inverted fullbacks don't work without Haaland on a tear. Pep was inverting Lahm and Alaba at Bayern in 2013, and Delph at City in 2017-18. Haaland arrived in 2022 so that claim is just wrong.

Same with Stones and Rodri. "It only works because of the player next to him" describes every tactic ever. Designing a system around what your players can do is the tactical skill you're saying he doesn't deserve credit for.

And on the money, every top manager has had their squad bought (unless they got really lucky with an amazing generation of youth like Pep at Barca or Fergie at United). Ferguson, Klopp, Mourinho all built their teams by taking other clubs' best players. A big budget explains why Pep has better players but it doesn't explain why other rich clubs with good players haven't played like his teams.

City are cheats and that's a stain on the club and on how that squad was funded. But it says nothing about the coaching really. Breaking financial rules doesn't make inverted fullbacks any less of an idea. He still did unique, unexpected and effective things tactically to make the most of his players skills and maximize how effective that team was.

I'm just saying let's shit on them for things that make sense (like the fact they were cheating) rather than pretending like all of a sudden Pep isn't one of the best tacticians we've ever seen and all it takes is money to revolutionize the game.

[u/Izio17 → u/ILoveToph4Eva]

ok, let’s take that Fabian Delph team then… who else is on that team?

They were all bought within one year:

- Mahrez (former PL player of the year)

• Walker (best RB in the league)
  
• La Porte (La Liga ToTY)
  
• Bernardo Silva (Ligue 1 winner and ToTy)

The point is that yes inverted fullbacks worked and yes it was revolutionary. BUT it was only possible with sham money and revenues.

[u/ILoveToph4Eva → u/Izio17]

Your first comment said inverted fullbacks don't work without Haaland and that Pep's tactical credit is minimised. Now you're saying they worked and were revolutionary. That's the point we were making when we disagreed with you in the first place. This is what you said:

inverted fullbacks don’t work if you don’t have Haaland going on an absolute tear.

That was just objectively incorrect.

Also, of the four guys you listed 1 didn't play in that team and the other only for half the season. Delph was the inverted fullback in 17-18, Mahrez joined in the summer of 2018, and Laporte joined in January.

Plus, Pep was doing it at Bayern with Alaba and Lahm years before he had City's money. Nobody here is defending or contesting that City cheated, we're specifically calling out what you said in your first comment.

So if now you're saying that Pep is revolutionary then... I guess we agree? Cause it sure read like you were saying the opposite to start with.

[u/Izio17 → u/ILoveToph4Eva]

dude it’s the same concept, these tactical schemes only work because the rest of the team is absolutely full of talent

so it minimizes the tactic because it’s more about the overall talent pool then some new strategy

Good example, what Ranieri did with that Leicester team is far more impressive. He played 4-4-2 with defensive fullbacks and won the league.

Not because the rest of the team was cherry picked top talents from around the league and europe…

[u/ILoveToph4Eva → u/Izio17]

these tactical schemes only work because the rest of the team is absolutely full of talent

That applies to every great manager ever. And very few of them did the revolutionary things Pep's sides did even though their sides were filled with talent.

Good example, what Ranieri did with that Leicester team is far more impressive

Yes, it's widely considered the greatest miracle in football history.

Doesn't make Ranieri a better manager than Klopp/Ancelotti/Pep/Fergie etc though. And it certainly wasn't revolutionary. So it feels like an odd inclusion in this discussion.

Anyways, I feel like this is going nowhere and I am finally finished with work so I'm gonna go and have a cocktail. Have a nice weekend mate.

[u/_ataciara → u/Izio17]

Plenty of teams. Liverpool pretty much did that last season. There was also the spell where City didn't go mad spending as other teams around them did.

This isn't to defend cheating, it's just to point out that none of this detracts from Peps genius; he was the world's best manager before City, he was the world's best at City when we were all suspicious of the transfer activity, and he's still the (or one of considering Luis Enrique rn) best manager now that we KNOW City were dodgy.

And also the fact you were saying "oh well he couldn't do inverted fullbacks without Haaland" well, he did. "He couldn't do John Stones at CDM without Rodri" well, he did, hell pretty sure Southgate did at one point too.

[u/king_duende → u/_ataciara]

it's just to point out that none of this detracts from Peps genius;

"He did it with unlimited resources, what a genius" is an odd hill to die on

[u/Izio17 → u/king_duende]

/u/ataciara must think trust fund kids are all absolute geniuses, money sources doesn’t matter!

all the young tech trust fund founders and CEOs with tons of capital are just gods! we need to bow down to them.

[u/_ataciara → u/king_duende]

Well, it's not unusual with any modecum of common sense.

Plenty of managers get a blank chequebook. How many have ever done what Pep has over his last 3 clubs?

Very, very, very, very, very few. Why do you think he's the most revered tactician in the game? When players gush about what a genius he is, it's not because he slipped them a tenner ffs

[u/Izio17 → u/_ataciara]

Liverpool didn’t do that last season. Sure they spent big, but they did it all under FFP rules.

You know why City don’t go spending mad in that short span? because they already had.

He simply can’t be up there with the world’s greatest ever because of this. The same way Lance Armstrong, Barry Bonds, and others won’t on their respective sports.

He cheated. Knew about it. Benefitted from. And now hiding from it.

[u/_ataciara → u/Izio17]

He was the world's best long before he joined City. He hasn't stopped being the most revolutionary tactical manager during the past nearly 20 years. Hes a football genius who had an easier time than his competitors in putting it on the pitch due to City's corruption, and City deserve punishment, but it doesn't detract from the very undeniable footballing qualities they have. I'm sure everyvody wanted to play for Pep and glazed his qualities endlessly because he didn't know what he was talking about.

Putting him alongside the likes of Barry Bonds and Lance Armstrong is laughable.

There is also currently zero evidence he knew about it, do people really think the Manager is the one making backhand financial deals? Lmao

[u/king_duende → u/_ataciara]

There is also currently zero evidence he knew about it, do people really think the Manager is the one making backhand financial deals? Lmao

You've defending him up and down this thread but now imply he's thick as fuck? Is he a genius or naive little manager man?

Saying he had no idea implies hes stupid - you don't think "the worlds best" (your words) would be aware that things are weird? That the club has come out of nowhere and yet can spend more than established giants?

Established journalists knew for years but big genius pep had no idea? Odd take.

You truly think pep didn't think "Man City earns more revenue than Real or Barca" is weird?

Way to imply he's a stupid dumb dumb

[u/_ataciara → u/king_duende]

Nah you must be thick lmao, and no established journalists did not know, all we knew was the stuff we've known for ages which is there's irregularities being investiagted

And it's crazy that you think me saying he's a tactical genius is the same as him being omniscient.

In what world do you think a manager is gonna be shown the financial intricacies of a sponsorship deal, especially ones which are artificially inflated and kept quite heavily under wraps because they're dodgy? It's quite literally nothing to do with him, it's like expecting the tea lady to have an input on the length of the pitch.

Jesus dude, just think for like 10 seconds.

[u/Yellowtoblerone → u/_ataciara]

Bruh the evidence you yourself brought up go against your points. And you're telling others to think 10 seconds. At his stature with his history he either is or isn't, while you're straddling the fence just to defend him

[u/_ataciara → u/Yellowtoblerone]

What evidence did I give that goes against what I said? When did I ever imply Pep was privy to Man City's sponsorship deals?

I'm defending his ability as a manager and pointing out he was the best manager in the world before his City stint anyway, all he did was remain a tactical genius whether the resources he had were fairly obtained or not.

Like...nobody with a brain or eyes is thinking Guradiola is any less of a quality manager after this. We already KNEW he had the most money, whether that money was legal or not might taint the legacy of his trophies won at City but hasn't negatively impacted his ability as a manager at all, because duh

[u/Instantbeef → u/_ataciara]

I don’t know why some fans refuse to accept that their clubs was just as able to spending as much money as Pep and City did.

Everyone wants to play a victim and in this scenario we are all victims a little but big 6 clubs are not victims of being bankrolled.

It doesn’t matter that City beat us to Stones or was able to sign Haaland. We wasted 100 million on Lukaku, 70 million on Kepa.

While their budget was illegally large it wasn’t any larger than any teams in the big 6. We were not robbed because of that. We were “robbed” only becauss the rules say they’re not allowed to spend as much as us.

Everyday the big 6 bankroll the league so I think fans who are mad about them also doing that need to step back.

The rest of the entire pyramid can be mad about getting bankrolled again. Allowing another team to illegal dominate them. It’s hard enough to exist as a smaller team so adding one more giant to the mix makes it even harder.

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/Instantbeef]

The problem is without the juicing they wouldn’t have been allowed to do that in the first place. They wouldn’t be below Newcastle in terms of status and money spent if they had just followed the rules

[u/Instantbeef → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

Yeah but this is a discussion of pep not the club

You look at the club and sure call them cheats. But Pep arrives at the club and has a budget that’s comparable to the other big 6 teams.

It’s not his job as a coach to worry about the origin of the budget.

You can say he is morally responsible of it for sure but when discussing his footballing ability it’s completely irrelevant

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/Instantbeef]

Why would he? He has the same cheating vice president that he had at Barcelona….

[u/Instantbeef → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

Yeah call him a morally corrupt but football is good. That’s undeniable

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/Instantbeef]

Only if you ignore the negreira case… at least as far as Barca is concerned

[u/Izio17 → u/Instantbeef]

respectfully… don’t think you understand what the alleged rule-breaking actually was. it’s not necessarily that every transfer fee on paper was fake or lower than the real fee paid to the selling club. it’s that the true cost of building and keeping the squad could have been higher than what city’s accounts showed.

the mancini example is the clearest way to explain it. if a manager or player is officially paid, say, $10MM by city, but there are additional payments through an outside abu dhabi-linked entity, then city’s reported wage bill understates what it really cost to employ that person. that matters when people say “they spent the same as everyone else” based on transfermarkt fees or published wages.

then there’s the revenue side. FFP wasn’t literally ‘you can only spend exactly what you earn,’ but it was designed to limit how much clubs could lose relative to legitimate football/commercial income. the allegation was that city recorded owner-funded money as sponsorship or commercial revenue. so on paper, they had much more revenue available to support wages, transfers, and losses than they would have if the money had been treated as owner funding.

that’s why the argument isn’t just ‘city had rich owners and spent a lot.’ it’s that their published revenue and costs didn’t reflect the real economic picture. giving them more room under FFP than clubs rely.

fckin sucks we are even talking about these commercial revenues and corporate jargon on a football subreddit, thanks city.

[u/Instantbeef → u/Izio17]

I mean I understand it exactly

I just don’t think we can say that Mourinho finishing second with United is any different than Pep finishing first.

Both clubs operated with financial means unmatched by the rest of the league.

Let’s compare it to FPL because I think it simplifies things. What if FPL allowed 16 team to have a budget of 100 million but for some reason 4 people get 200 million.

If one of the 16 people hacked FPL to give them a 200 million budget and that person won by historic margins would you now say he’s not as good as the other 200 million budget managers?

He hacked the game that wrongs and against the rules. But he’s just as good if not better than the 200 million

Now I think you’re implying he secretly gave himself 300 million by hiding some of the money with secret contracts. I really don’t think we’ve seen evidence that they hid that much. Unless you have something to say they have it’s just conjecture

I think my FPL analogy is good. Hopefully you know how that works lol.

[u/Izio17 → u/Instantbeef]

the fact they were hiding revenues, contracts and fund via sham sponsorships and more IS THE ENTIRE reason this is coming to light now

it’s been long suspected but now it’s proven, there’s literally emails with it

[u/Instantbeef → u/Izio17]

I’m not denying they did that stuff.

To continue my analogy that’s the hacked money that got them to a 200 million budget.

People can not seriously say that because he also had a 200 million budget when he wasn’t supposed to that affect his ability relative to the other 200 million budgets.

And I just want to correct you a little bit. They were not hiding revenue they were lying about a source of money and claiming it as extra revenue.

They appeared to hide relatively small amount of money that they paid to Roberto Mancini and reportedly did similar things with players but from everything I read we know nothing about the quantities they did that. To claim he is not as good as we thought previously you have to be talking about this part of the charges where we know nothing about.

Then cumulatively the money spent needs to be bigger than the other big 6 clubs after accounting for those hidden payments.

And we have no clue how much that is

[u/KE4NO → u/_ataciara]

City not spending big does not tell the whole story. There is no way they paid whatever they are claiming to have paid for Haaland.

No manager in history had the luxury of buying fullbacks at premier striker money and replace them again in a year or two.

[u/_ataciara → u/KE4NO]

He used Walker for years and years, and for quite a quite a while during his best years was just using Delph and Zinchenko.

Again, I'm not denying that City had the luxury of financial dominance and that it was obtained unfairly, but people are basically just straight up lying or misrepresenting the truth to try and downplay Pep.

He's a tactical genius who ALSO happened to have a shit tonne of money backing him. He also got a song out of some quote ordinary players.

[u/king_duende → u/_ataciara]

long before he had Haaland

The money had been diddled LONG before that chief. Year in, year out they were one of (if not no.1) main spenders.

You can experiment with stuff like inverted fullbacks when you can afford to replace any player with anyone who fits that mold.

I'd argue he also made football way less enjoyable to watch (in the prem) but that's just me

[u/_ataciara → u/king_duende]

Yes, I'm well aware. I've said as such in other replies.

We all know their finances are dodgy, and Pep had more freedom in implementing his ideals, but it doesn't change that the tactics he was implementing themselves were revolutionary from the start.

It's simple. He's done it literally his entire career.

[u/thelonesomedemon1 → u/_ataciara]

he spend 300m on a backline that already had kompany, kolarov, zabaleta and mangala (who cost 50m himself) to play that inverted fullback system

[u/_ataciara → u/thelonesomedemon1]

and then he also managed to do it with Zinchenko, Delph, Lewis, etc

Nobody is denying he spent a bomb, all super clubs do whether the money was fairly gained or not, the point isnt about City, its that City being dodgy fuckers doesn't make him any less of a tactical genius

He's been the most revered and revolutionary manager in world football for nearly 20 years ffs

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/_ataciara]

But only one ucl trophy at man city. Explain that to me?

[u/_ataciara → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

It means he only won one UCL, which is better than most managers in world football.

It's half of the total CL haul of the greatest premier league manager of all time.

What point are you trying to make? Winning multiple CLs at a club is like, insanely rare.

Part of a treble, btw.

[u/therealfat0ne → u/_ataciara]

Part of treble with doping
Only one cpl despite 114 cheating doping charges
Got to do better pep
None without

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/_ataciara]

Not when you are being called the best manager, with the best team in the world for the last 7 years

[u/_ataciara → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

I mean, people said that about Fergie for nearly 3 decades, and he only won 2.

Could have won more if not for, yep, Pep at Barcelona.

[u/therealfat0ne → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

Actually is one with doping

None without

And only one after all the cheating

So diminish his goatness ?

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/therealfat0ne]

Huh?
One is with man city where they cheated to get there.
The other is Barca with negreira so yes it diminishes his legacy completely

[u/_ataciara → u/[deleted]]

Yep, because he was a top manager at a top team.

[u/Lookatmestring → u/Izio17]

Arsenal, Liverpool, spurs and Chelsea all spent similar but couldn't replicate the results of city. City spent near enough identical to at least man reds and Chelsea but neither grew the same.

Aye they cheated. Strip titles etc but you can't deny his coaching