wmknake-xufor

Recent Posts

  • A fair punishment

    After almost 2 years, Manchester City has been found guilty of 114 out of 115 breaches of financial fair play. Between 2009 and 2019, City failed to properly report finances on many occasions. The biggest offence is that they reported that Etihad paid them 67.5 million for their sponsorship, but in reality they paid 8 million, and the owners paid the other 59.5 million out of their own pocket. This would be counted as commercial revenue, which opened them up to spending more while technically staying within financial guidelines.

    So what’s the best punishment?

    Everton got deducted 10 points for 2 rule breaks; according to the math, Manchester City would get -575 points. This would relegate them for one year, but they won 3 titles in that time, so how is that fair?


    That leads us to the next option. Stripping of the titles. But who would they go to? The second-place team? But that’s just a hypothetical: what if the team they would have replaced City took points off them, and the 3rd-place team would have won? We will never know. So that doesn’t make sense.  What if you just didn’t give it to anyone? Then you would have 3 holes in history. Would none of the games actually have happened? That also doesn’t make sense to me.

    Another option would be financial. Chelsea was fined 10 million for one offense. In case you can’t do the math, that’s 1,140 million they would have to pay. They made 600m for winning the prem alone, not including sponsorships or broadcasting rights. With the remaining 540m to pay, they could generate almost all of that with player sales. But we have to keep in mind Chelsea self-reported, so the fine would most likely be bigger. Chelsea also received a 2-year suspended transfer ban. In my opinion, that would mean City would get a full transfer ban. But with no players and a transfer ban, they would not be able to afford a free agent’s wages and would be left with no players.

    Here’s what I think should happen. A points deduction of enough to see them relegated across 2 seasons (they would end up in League One), as well as a 2-year transfer ban and an 800 million-pound fine.

  • The Goalkeeper Problem at Chelsea

    Chelsea brought Martínez in to solve a problem, but in doing so, they created another one. 

    So far, he simply hasn’t convinced. His reactions look slow, he seems slow getting down to shots, his distribution has been poor, and worst of all, his command of crosses has been abysmal. For Hull’s second goal, he has to take the blame. That is exactly the sort of situation you expect an experienced Chelsea goalkeeper to deal with.

    We’ve already seen that Penders has enormous potential and can make outstanding saves. But we’ve also seen one obvious weakness in his game: dealing with crosses and commanding his area. So who is he supposed to learn from? I thought the whole point of bringing in an experienced goalkeeper was to give Chelsea a reliable number one for a few years while Penders develops behind him. The senior keeper plays, brings stability and experience, and helps Penders learn the finer details of the position. Then, when the time is right, Penders takes over. But if Martínez himself looks uncomfortable under crosses, how is he supposed to help Penders improve in exactly the area where the youngster needs the most guidance?

    Martínez is, in my opinion, doing no better than a Robert Sánchez in form. Maybe Martínez is more experienced; maybe he’s better suited to help Penders, but he isn’t showing it right now.