Matt Walker is a class act. Should get Kieran Maguire on at somepoint too 👍🏻

Football doesn't have much talk about actual Football these days does it?

Not a fan ! Should just be fans Or carra neville should have checked all the facts before coming on Otherwise it be full of journos sitting out in front

Only thing to pick at is maybe a bit longer. But yeah much more interactive, great show

Robbie has been relegated

🤣

And “at this moment in time”

And to be fair

I wish I played for Liverpool

Harry Kane is gold

sheikh Mansour owes it to the payers of man city his firm ADUG has secretly being funded sponsorship deals on behalf of Etihad airways for the last 10 years

Some would say that's Gary's better side

@@geckopubg Gis a lend of 20 quid pal

@@geckopubg you thought you were the big man on the block splashing your cash and now the emir of Qatar is gonna come humble you and destroy all of us. Nice one Todd

Sardines in a carra-nevell can. London delicacy.

Gary really does not want to go hard on this. FA national audits inbound, especially for teams with foreign investors, Salford City. Set trousers to 'soil'!

He’s busy paying back the hundreds of thousands in tax that he avoided whilst United manager!

😂 You little genius

Lmao

Ferguson masterclass he predicted this

Few days ago - Pep calls out 9 PL Clubs writing to PL to have City Banned,while Chelsea spend 600M Few days later - PL Sanction City PL not Corrupt?😂

Agreed. Nice work.

Stay tuned 👀

Need to get Howson on here for that!!

@@TheOverlap get in

Do we ignore the United fans majorly screaming at Ten Haag to move him to DM or LB after a couple of games too???

@@LoCoAde87 Yes, cause they're idiots

Kiss arse clown world loves you too

You're basically vindicating City with that point.

Football agents are a cancer , surely there's alternatives to these parasites...

Agree...I would say that's a better way to attempt to limit a monopoly.

As with anything, it’s not what you know - but who you know. £30-40M worth of player like Ruben Neves move to Wolves in Championship - when every top club in Europe would have taken him for right price.

Players and agents now run the market of transfers. All the power is in the hands of the players, and clubs will work with likes of Mendea and Kia Jorabarichshsgan to smooth those costs. Ruben Neves doesn’t end up at Wolves, and Tevez/Mascherano never play for West Ham

It's a very socialist type concept, trying to limit the gap between the top and the bottom. It will never work.

99% , City fans are showing selective blindness , they have cheated .... FFP is unfair at times but they bought the Etihad naming rights off Manchester council for £2m and sold them for £300m literally the next day , inflated sponsors to cheat round FFP

Its a pretty socialist model. It won't ever happen. I'm not saying it shouldn't but it is hugely unlikely.

And of course he will change once United is bough by a Qatari investor 😁

Robbie has been relegated

I think Chev Neville is against the FFP exactly because of Salford. He said in a interview on Sky Sports that owners should be spend how much they want. Maybe he's changing his tone, because he knows majority are against it. He shifts his stand constanstly.

@@thinlizzywhiskeyinmejar7484 When FFP was pitched, it was to stop clubs from going into administration. If an owner puts up their own money (not debt in the club's name), then it can't hurt the club. FFP was stated to help clubs become sustainable, in reality it's biggest impact was cementing existing hierarchies and increasing inequality between clubs.

Get a grip

@@notafuckingvlogger Thanks for the comment

@@notafuckingvlogger maybe you should? :)

​@@surendran9311 He was probably doing that while he typed with his other hand

Gimp

Same here, wanna see his takes on Liverpool and ask Jamie what his opinion is on Licha now

Is that the half horse, half man ponytail guy that sits through watchalongs looking like he wants to die all the time? “oh, 2-0 cool😔”

Lol United fans always make it about themselves

@@Ladtyuven223wait who’s that he sounds sad poor guy

@@barker1438 Agree with that, so wish it was more often but I guess hard for Gary and Carra with their workloads. Thanks for the comment bud!

Looking forward to GNev once again doubling down on Arsenal not making the top four!

@@wriches and carra saying something very dumb

🤣🤣💀

A lot of people wouldn't give him a hard time if he wasn't ex-United imo. They think he has an agenda for rivals even though he's said great things about Liverpool, City and Arsenal. He is definitely biased around United and specifically Ole but you can't throw your boy under the bus 😂

@@ANGELOFDARKification Hargreaves is an ex united fan and he is much more level headed. Also doesn't get a hard time. It's not because of the club.

yea not like them liverpool pundits that just slag united off every time they are on, and if it's not united it's united's players.

As a city fan respect to gary neville👏

Up the chels

Works better in the American model where they have salary caps - so if they tie a key player down to a long term contract, it opens up more room for them to invest in others as the salary cap increases. I just don't see it having the same effect here, in terms of a positive one. Definitely ways it can turn the other way on them

@@Shrewdy1 Not really because you still have the issue of one or 2 players taking up a massive amount of the cap... NFL quarterback salaries take up a huge percentage of the cap on one player... I'd suspect these long term contracts are full of incentives.... so a player will sign a 70k a week contract for 8 years instead of a 140k a week for 4 with the knowledge that each performance marker will result in either a pay out lump sum or a salary increase... If they don't reach the incentives they're stuck on the lower rate of pay which makes it easier to get rid of them if needed to or to simply cut them (although this is unlikely) Mudryk for example would probably be offered almost double what he's on just now but for half the time on the contract were he to have been bought by Utd, City or Madrid

@@no9scrum Good perspective and valid points!

American sports have no relegation system, once they failed, most teams will tank to pick the best talent available for free. In english football once your experiment failed, you will be stucked and drop to league one just like Sunderland.

that is a bad idea..

Because that's how football and sports work. The best clubs and the best teams win

@barker143 🤣🤣🤣🤣💥

If only everyone would think before they spoke 😉😉

Jealous of who? We've got more than double their trophies! That goes for Liverpool, Arsenal and Manchester United.

Jealous? City are about to be relegated, see if we're jealous then lmao

Jealous of being at the centre of one of the biggest scandals of English football history? LOL yeah super jealous gronk!

They're indeed jealous. The premier league elites conspired against City to weaken the club.

How can we be jealous of a plastic club, your club was sponsored by the Spanish Royal family for half a century, say no less.

This is very true

I mean it’s a one window thing as we can’t do it next window so it’s not really a long term thing

It's getting boring

Or “at this moment in time”

A dollar?

"absolutely"

Independent regulator = arsene wenger, David gill…. STOP THIS RACIST GAME!

Robbie has been relegated

City's - as in City is - just love correcting people like you!

@@MrMarketingGuy not this time

@@MrMarketingGuy penis

@@MrMarketingGuy * slow clap *

WE DO WHAT WE WANT WE DO WHAT WE WANT.... WERE MAN CITY WE DO WHAT WE WANT... CITY CITY

Yeah wish others were given a chance

Seriously, he actually thinks he sounds so smart. He words stuff like he thinks he’s sounding so poetic and wise yet he speaks a whole lot of crap 😂

Kick em out

No chance. 115 breaches, it's not just a few. You're deluding yourselves into thinking you'll be okay.

Nope we're not, they tried to make us successful and that they've done... If it's proven they took illegal means to invest more of their personal money in the club, that's a great sacrifice I'd forever admire... I'm not one for social morality

Blinkered? Where's the proof that you've been privvy to then? How have you established guilt?

@@Beyond_Belief534 delusional

The City fan clearly doesn't understand that "match fixing" and "doping substances" are not the only ways you can rig a level playing field in your favour. Very biased and blinded. Actually, even the term "financial doping" used by Neville and Carragher is a euphemism for the allegations: stating that a business is bringing in more income than it actually does is fraud, pure and simple. In non-football contexts a business doing that would be in serious trouble.

fuming ? all relaxed because i'm sure city innocent dragging city into this right now not a coincidence for sure something fishy going around to put pressure on city and make arsenal in comfort zone winning the title , everybody talking about how city will get punish but forgotten how city will respond and react to this

ANGELOFDARKification Well said feller. 90% of transfer fees are paid over 3 years. Very few transfers are paid all in one lump sum. One thing.....7 and 8 years? Are you sure the transfer fees are being paid in instalments over that long? I know the player contracts are for 7 and 8 years but I wasn't aware the transfer fees were being paid over that length of time as well. In fact I'd be shocked if that is the case. Also I'm sure the Shakhtar owner said something about 3 yearly instalments (I could be wrong though).

@@danniwilder2198 I think for FFP they will account it over that many years. In terms of the actual money being sent over, it would probably depend on the club. For e.g. I think Benfica got a decent amount right now but will get 120mill over the next couple seasons. I dont know if that's due to it being a release clause kind of thing though.

agreed. Chelsea are playing within thr current rules vs what Man City are accused of. They are spreading the cost of these transfers via amortisation across a larger span of time so end of year accounts look healthier. The risk they take is that some expensive signings are a bust and stuck on long contracts. That said if Enzo is a bust after 2 years and they sell him for 70 mill. In their accounts they won't suffer a 35 mill loss on the 105 they spent. They will have likely paid 40 mill by that time so for that financial year they would actually show a profit on that deal and the losses will be smaller over the following years rather than one hit

@@ANGELOFDARKification The problems with Benfica came about when they started to insist on the whole payment straight away in one go. Naturally Chelsea were taken aback by this because that's not how things are usually done, especially when the amount involved is so large. It wasn't like Chelsea were asking for anything out of the ordinary. I am very convinced Chelsea were expecting to pay it over 3 years, as is the norm. The fact of it being a release clause that Chelsea were triggering would make no difference to the payment arrangements. Rui Costa was just trying to be difficult with everything. I'm guessing that was because of how he desperately didn't want to lose the player mid season.

@@scottallan7931 If a player on a long contract is a 'bust', as you put it, then just like with any other player the club will sell him on. Whether he's on a 5 yr contract or an 8 yr contract it won't make any difference. Why should being on an 8 yr contract make it any harder to sell that player? I'm sorry but I cannot fathom out your figures & calculations at all. Once a player has left a club & is under a contract with another club he does not figure at all for amortisation purposes of the club he's left. Once a player has left Chelsea there is no more amortisation cost for that player. It stops the moment he signs a contract with his new club. There has been much hysteria & it is out of all proportion with the issue. The difference an 8 yr contract makes with a 5 yr contract in respect to the annual amortisation cost of a player is really quite minimal. I estimate the difference for Enzo Fernandez in year one to be about £6.2m & for Mudryk to be about £8.4m and for Badiashile to be about £2.6m. Those figures are for year one. A player's annual amortisation cost is different each year of his contract. I estimate Chelsea overall amortisation cost to be about £23m less this year to what it would've been had those players signed 5 year contracts instead of 7 and 8 year contracts. I'd love to be able to quote Chelsea total 22/23 amortisation amount but that can't be done without having really credible information on every player's length of contract, annual gross salary, & correct transfer fee including what, if any, transfer fee add-ons have been activated to date. To reduce your total amortisation cost by approx £23m in one year is not to be sniffed at & it all helps with FFP, however, £23m is not an amount that is going to impact the plans of Todd Boehly in any kind of way. I'd be very surprised if the main reason for giving young players 7 & 8 year contracts has anything to do with complying with FFP rules. It may be one factor in the club's thinking but I simply cannot believe FFP is THE reason for giving longer contracts.

The team could get worse then you’re paying the players 250 300+ grand a week to sit on the bench. They ain’t moving to somewhere that will only pay them 100 so you’ll have to pay them off so you’re stuck and top new players won’t join a team that isn’t in the CL or winning titles or like currently with potential to do those things. I can only see this going badly but Tbf I don’t care coz I don’t support them

Think Chelsea will be fine because RA wiped the debt and they've got a lot of assets, I think for other clubs to move large amounts of transfer business into the future accounts could lead to them going out of business which is exactly what FFP is designed to stop

@@IanElkins they aren't making 250 300+. Mudryk isn't even on 100.

@The Fire Starter This is Chelsea, not Arsenal who payed Ozil 350g a week.

@@IanElkinsnone of the players newly signed with long contracts have more than 100k. So that won’t be a problem

nothing to deny. FFP was meant to stop city

Wow you're amazing at wishful thinking 👏

Stuff them they should go soon as guilty 1 billion fine sell more oil they'll be back in 3 years

So weird haha

He's an absolute muppet

I feel the same cause we'll jist spend money again anyway, honestly I don't care, it's 100% something out fans would do is turn up in absolute numbers if we got relegated for this 😅 like yea it's shit but, I've many other things to worry about 😅😅

Interesting how the guy whose arguably benefitted the most from billionaire owners isn’t really interested about his clubs finances… hmmm… I wonder why

This guy is a bell end. Waffles on and on.

He literally spoke over everyone as soon as they countered his point 🤣

to do what?

Oh please

Bludd said Topspur 💀

Shame he’s a cobham sexual because he actually speaks alot of good

What about Rory?

What about him?

Liverpool fan Channel is Paul from Redmen TV.

who do you want to know

Why are they culprits?

@@martinblomqvist1870 Bc in his tiny little mind they’re both guilty regardless of what the current facts are. Guaranteed he’s a United, LFC or Arsenal fan and hates the idea of the“nouveau riche” football clubs Chelsea & City competing with against them. Incidentally why many think FFP was really brought into the PL to begin - to ensure the upper class had no new members at the table

@@martinblomqvist1870 Sorry mate, I forgot it's 2023 and nobody is allowed to joke about anything anymore. Of course they aren't culprits, I was only fooling around.

@@MCFCTheMadHatter someone's fuming.