PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

LeonardoDaVnci said:
When desperate journos throw in the standard "human rights" curve ball while covering City its a pathetic attempt at adopting the moral high ground. Its meant to add to their journalistic integrity, its saying "Look at me everyone, look how good I am, I'm quoting Amnesty International that makes me better then anybody from the UAE". It reeks of hypocrisy, a bit like when The Guardian starts moralizing about the evils of transatlantic slavery when it was founded entirely absolutely 100% by the profits of Slave Traders. But they think its fine to adopt the moral high ground on virtually every societal issue imaginable because one day they printed the words "We're so Sorry".

Look at this from the Amnesty International report for 2022/2023, this is lambasting us the UNITED KINGDOM, not the UAE, but of course this is the type of 'inconvenient truth' that the likes of the BBC/Guardian etc choose to ignore when City bashing.

View attachment 111918
Ref: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/5670/2023/en/
Click to expand...
Having decent accommodation, enough to eat and water that doesn't contain raw sewage are also human rights. Ones that many in the UK don't have.

Emiratis have decent accommodation, education paid for up to tertiary level and good medical services. Better than us in many ways.
 
ganganvince said:
www.independent.co.uk

Manchester City still making millions from image rights deals

Exclusive: Despite claiming they were forfeiting the income to help comply with Uefa's Financial Fair Play rules, The Independent understands the club are still making millions
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
There's a bit here
Click to expand...
That reminds me, the FA Cup win bonus, is one argument the whatsapp group always like to bring up, while using their best smug face but it doesn't seem to be part of the PL charges and it wasn't with UEFA's.

Is that because it's not a significant enough amount, to argue a sporting advantage was gained(break even calculations). Or is it because City have a reasonable explanation for it?

Has anyone ever come up with a plausible answer City might have had, out of interest?
 
If I'm correct that the crux of these allegations are that Sheikh Mansour paid the majority of the Etihad sponsorship himself then I highly doubt there would be a transfer from one of his accounts to Etihad for the exact amount of the shortfall. In fact, I doubt there would be any transfers of any amount between them. More likely the AD government could have added a couple of billion on to the billions they already give Etihad on the premise the sponsorship is paid. Therefore it would be almost impossible to prove any wrong doing.
Most likely however is that everything is above board especially with the intense scrutiny we are always under.
 
Gaylord du Bois said:


Fancy voting for that. Haha.
Click to expand...

I like Kieran Maguire, but Football Insider has become one of the most click-bait sites around. Pretty sure when it started, it had lofty ideals, but it's gone lowest common denominator really quickly.

That £500m include wages, agent fees and transfers, so we're probably not far off that most years anyway.
 
foggy1974 said:
How to create to easy clickbait

Doest this mean those cultist at the other end of the East Lancs Rd, who like to portray themselves as shoestring fc can spend similar amounts
Click to expand...

Some of these so called City accounts are worse than any opposition ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.