Eddie Howe will have spent this week doing everything he can to help Newcastle beat Manchester City. If he is able to, it will be in no small part down to having spent more than two years since their takeover trying to be like
Manchester City . Amanda Staveley, who was also involved in City's 2008 takeover, boldly promised in her role in the new Newcastle ownership that they had the same ambitions as the Blues and there have been moves to align more closely ever since. Two big moves came off the field with the introduction of Darren Eales as CEO and Dan Ashworth as sporting director to install a new hierarchy at the club. There has also been investment in the academy that has included taking both players and staff directly from City; Paul McLaren left the Blues to head up Newcastle's youth recruitment and 18-year-old Alfie Harrison was signed in the January transfer window. ALSO READ: Man City given one huge injury boost but two players will miss Newcastle amid Kevin De Bruyne issue ALSO READ: 'From now on' -
Pep Guardiola challenges Man City fans after
Manchester United atmosphere However, there hasn't been the huge spending that characterised previous takeovers. That is in part down to tightened spending rules that weren't originally in place for City (or
Chelsea or others for that matter) that limit the amount of investment that can be made and treated as a loss; Howe said on Friday that a squad overhaul would be 'almost impossible' because of the Profit & Sustainability Rules in place. Just as Financial Fair Play arrived in time to tell the world that the Abu Dhabi United Group making annual losses to invest in City's squad was bad, now the Public Investment Fund (PIF) of
Saudi Arabia cannot find a way to spend its fortune on Newcastle without generating enough revenue first to be seen as sustainable.
Premier League clubs have also pushed to ban related party sponsorship deals and clubs now have to prove to the league that their agreements are fair value, as the ceiling pushes down on Newcastle's ambition. That means there is less room for mistakes, and Newcastle have been counting the cost of a few this season. There is an element of bad luck around the injuries for Harvey Barnes since his £40m move last summer and Lewis Hall may improve to justify his £30m price tag, but paying £55m on Sandro Tonali when the midfielder was then quickly given a year's ban for gambling was poor planning that may have pushed plans back. Newcastle have also discovered some of the issues that come with more global interest whether they want them or not, just as City did. A piece in a north-east newspaper last year said that Newcastle should 'avoid' being the next City because of how 'soulless' the Etihad was. The article ticked off the usual ignorant bingo tropes like not being able to sell the ground out and nobody from Maine Road sticking around, before moving onto why the atmosphere was so bad. "Some diehards remain," it read, "but the matchday crowd tends to be swelled by sightseers and tourists, ticking the club off on their list of must-sees." Ticketing is certainly an issue at the Etihad as it is at every other big club - there were half-and-half scarves on display at the Etihad for the derby two weeks ago, and at Anfield for the City game last week - and since their takeover that is also true of Newcastle too. There have been grumbles from matchgoing Geordies this season about the increase in tourists at their games, and a seemingly bigger push from the club to give tickets to families because they spend more on a matchday. Even if Newcastle don't want to then, they are becoming more like City because they are living through the same experiences at fan and boardroom level. Newcastle have gone from writing to the Court of Arbitration for Sport to try and ensure City are kicked out of the
Champions League in 2020 to being united on related party sponsorship deals and bemoaning the premise of FFP. However, on top of the circumstances of the takeover and the personnel involved it is far too easy to treat the owners of Newcastle and City together when the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have fundamental differences. They have very different
Human Rights records for a start, but also no matter what has been said it is not possible to say with confidence that they have the same goals. Sheikh Mansour has protected and grown his investment in City to make them the best team in the world over a decade when many predicted he would lose interest and walk away.
Cricket, Formula 1 and
golf are all of interest to the country but City are by far and away the biggest brand. In contrast, PIF's acquiring of Newcastle is one of several hugely ambitious projects that they have taken to that include LIV Golf, the Saudi Pro League and the bid for the 2034
World Cup. If Newcastle isn't as big a part of the portfolio, will it be given the focus that City has had? Newcastle overachieved last season under Howe to make the top four, and that meant no safety parachute for things to go wrong in the summer and in this campaign, which they have. They arrive at the Etihad with the FA Cup their only realistic chance of qualifying for Europe again next year. City, meanwhile, did not look back after finally reaching the Champions League and have taken part every year since 2011; they have just been drawn in their seventh consecutive quarter-final and are defending champions. They do not need an FA Cup win for Europe but will do if they want to achieve the unthinkable of retaining their Treble, which is still on the table in the middle of March. That level is the ultimate for any club to try to reach, but Newcastle travel to Manchester with questions over how much they still want to follow City's model and how much they are actually able to.