1
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Soccer (Closing)
154 readers
1 users here now
This community is being retired in favor of [email protected].
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Chelsea walked financial doping so City could run with it.
I’m sure I read somewhere that relative to transfer fees at the time Chelsea were bankrolled more than City.
Yes. Adjusted for inflation, the amount Chelsea spent under Abromovich is insane even compared to City.
I thought the issue is that when Chelsea got taken over, what they did wasn't "against the rules"
There weren't any FFP rules.
Earlier the 3 foreigner rule made clubs rely on regional players so they couldn't just splash money all over.
If there weren't that rule then Berlusconi would've bought the whole Dutch national team
Man City pay a lot to players and management under the table though so this is apples and oranges
Our funds came openly and directly via the owner, there were no FFP issues to try and skirt around at the time. City are funded by fake sponsors in an attempt to bypass FFP.
Did you read the article? Most of these off-book payments are from 2010-2017, after FFP had been introduced.