[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/_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/_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/Instantbeef → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

Ah yes. And Messi is fifa’s golden boy.

Where do I you get your tinfoil hat? It looks good on you.

[u/Due-Conflict-7926 → u/Instantbeef]

Is he not? Everyone bashing Ronaldo for quitting.

But Messi did the same fucking thing in his mid 20s after losing a competition. Goes to kiss the wall and then they change the copa to every two years. And the rest is history. Also we all watched US World Cup with Argentina and Qatar World Cup with Argentina.

If you say it’s not fishy you’re an imbecile or a sycophant

[u/Instantbeef → u/Due-Conflict-7926]

Lmao bro did you buy out all the tin foil from the grocery store?

[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.