Almost..
Act like United wasnt the ritchest club in the EPL by far when fergie was manager...
You need to take note of the sums back then. The differences were not that massive.
And even then MU had to play the rules. Rules like honest accounting and could not spend (practically) unlimited money off balance sheet.
The financial gap between clubs is much bigger today and in teh case of city and PSG quasi-infinite.
Also for around 30% of SAF's reign the richest was Abramovich's Chelsea (since 2004). And that was SAF's most successful period.
-
You are addressing a question I did not ask.
I am focusing on them breaking the rules.
What is the use of rules if teams can just do what they want?
-
Lastly I think what abramovich did at chelsea was good, even though they had more money.
It meant that the prem had another good team and it made the prem attract better players.
Likewise (so far) newcastle are doing well from their takeover.
Chelsea have won the most since 2004 out of all clubs in england and people just accept it because by all accounts Chelsea followed the rules.
Hiding income could get you imprisoned in other circumstances and is a crime of moral turpitude.
I read a tweet saying Man City should be disappointed they didn't collect all possible 114 points in the premier league.
.
pastebin.com
