Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

[uwe rosler 28]

Nothing to worry about here

 

[M18CTID]

Let's face it - that UEFA statement tells us nothing. It's the kind of statement I'd expect them to make - especially as they're no doubt getting mithered about it from all and sundry - and it doesn't assume any guilt on City's part. This bit is telling: "....UEFA will use that to challenge the figures and will seek explanation, clarification or rebuttal from the club concerned."

 

[Kokonut1307]

I'm sure we'll be investigated and I'm sure it'll go to Court, but the catalyst won't be City wishing to defend themselves. It'll be the pressure being cranked up on UEFA and the EPL by the old guard. They want the total destruction of our club and they want it permanent, and faced with either losing the Champions League or taking on City, UEFA will take the latter option IMO, however much danger that entails for them

There is not much UEFA can do with this in a court. City have not done anything illegal, and these documents have been obtained illgeally. The very reason we had a settlement is because UEFA got scared of a court case that would annull their FFP, which certainly is illegal.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I'm sure we'll be investigated and I'm sure it'll go to Court, but the catalyst won't be City wishing to defend themselves. It'll be the pressure being cranked up on UEFA and the EPL by the old guard. They want the total destruction of our club and they want it permanent, and faced with either losing the Champions League or taking on City, UEFA will take the latter option IMO, however much danger that entails for them

I wonder if the so-called elite across Europe will be crowd-funding UEFArce's legal fees? I bet Der Spiegel don't have a report on that possibility!

 

[Blu1]

Ha ha you have to laugh at all of this.

If we ever leave brexit can we then just tell them all to fffooookkkkkk oooffff ? Lol

 

[OB1]

I'm sure we'll be investigated and I'm sure it'll go to Court, but the catalyst won't be City wishing to defend themselves. It'll be the pressure being cranked up on UEFA and the EPL by the old guard. They want the total destruction of our club and they want it permanent, and faced with either losing the Champions League or taking on City, UEFA will take the latter option IMO, however much danger that entails for them

I'm not so sure it will be investigated. We don't know for sure what City and UEFA agreed last time round. UEFA's reference to confidentiality last week and their talk of case-by-case in latest pronouncement continues to give me hope that City have (confidential) agreement in writing to absolutely no retrospective action.

I also think UEFA could struggle to prove anything even if Mansour has funneled "investment" via sponsors: they cannot look beyond those sponsors published financials.

And, if it comes to it, I still believe FFP is anti-competitive and open to legal challenge.

 

[CC1]

Nothing to worry about here

How do you know?? I don’t trust the spineless b********. They don’t care about right and wrong as long as the so-called elite old clubs are kept happy

 

[oakiecokie]

How do you know?? I don’t trust the spineless b********. They don’t care about right and wrong as long as the so-called elite old clubs are kept happy

Is unfortunately the correct answer.

 

[Sir peace frog]

What people are missing out is the full statement from UEFA they say all clubs accounts get looked at after a rolling 3 year's and if anything is irregular it will look into it the statement wasn't directed at us specifically

 

[waspish]

Funny thing is if ffp was the one that got changed in 2015 all this shit wouldn’t be happening. Uefa and g14 moving goalposts when ever they feel it will effect them.

 

[laserblue]

I think he's said John isn't his real name and he lived in Portugal but might not be Portuguese and he was handed the data by someone and is not sure where it came from but it is not hacked

Apparently his name is Rui Costa and is Portuguese but is currently in Hungary. He's been accused of attempted extortion and is in hiding from some very angry people. It seems he doesn't do the hacking himself but organises others to do his bidding. The City stuff appears to have been done to order. Basically he's a ****.

 

[rice10]

Many have said that if UEFA had not moved the goal posts City would have passed FFP first time round but would we have still passed FFP if UEFA knew that Sheikh Mansour was the one paying many of our sponsorships (assuming this to in fact be true)?

 

[George Hannah]

BT wading in now with their podcast featuring these three contemptible Mirror hacks

http://sport.bt.com/sport-hurts/foo...ished-by-off-field-allegations-91364309657278

currently not loading for some reason - I made a formal complaint last night although it's unlikely the two events are connected

"Football Writers Podcast: Man City brilliance tarnished by off-field allegations

"Mike Calvin, Darren Lewis and Tom Hopkinson look at the financial allegations against Manchester City following their dominant derby victory over Man United and break down the key talking points at both ends of the Premier League table.”
Published on 12 November 2018"

You have allowed these 3 Mirror employees to use BT Sport to create the impression that Man City FC has done something wrong and that the achievements of the club have in some way been tainted.
You are no doubt aware of the club’s statement that these allegations are an organised attempt to damage their reputation and are based on purportedly stolen materials. You should also be further aware the source of Der Spiegel's leaks is a known extortionist.
BT has a legal and moral duty to ensure that unlawfully obtained documents are not used to make unsubstantiated allegations on its platform and you have failed to meet your obligations in this respect.
It is an indefensible editorial decision to allow these individuals air time to try to damage Man City and I would like an explanation of your conduct in this matter.
Was any payment made or received by BT for this reprehensible podcast?

 

[Blue Mist]

Many have said that if UEFA had not moved the goal posts City would have passed FFP first time round but would we have still passed FFP if UEFA knew that Sheikh Mansour was the one paying many of our sponsorships (assuming this to in fact be true)?

195 posts, at least 3 of which have been in this thread since June 2009. If the three negative ones in here are anything to go by, what are your other posts like ?

Just askin'.

 

[laserblue]

Can only see this ending up in court as the attacks are relentless and at some point we have to defend ourselves.

I'd like to think so mate but the nagging doubt I have is that, by accepting the full and final settlement with UEFA, City may be regarded as having implicitly accepted the validity of FFP.

 

[Blue Mist]

I'd like to think so mate but the nagging doubt I have is that, by accepting the full and final settlement with UEFA, City may be regarded as having implicitly accepted the validity of FFP.

Not neccasarily (sp) This is civil case as opposed to criminal. What often happens is lawyers sit down and agree a fee and there is a legal line put in it which basically says it is done without admitting anything. Further I am sure they would stick a line in to cover any future so called ne evidence, any decent lawyer would, If they try re -investigating us you have to assume our lawyers will simply remind them of the agreement reached before.

 

[M18CTID]

BT wading in now with their podcast featuring these three contemptible Mirror hacks

http://sport.bt.com/sport-hurts/foo...ished-by-off-field-allegations-91364309657278

currently not loading for some reason - I made a formal complaint last night although it's unlikely the two events are connected

"Football Writers Podcast: Man City brilliance tarnished by off-field allegations

"Mike Calvin, Darren Lewis and Tom Hopkinson look at the financial allegations against Manchester City following their dominant derby victory over Man United and break down the key talking points at both ends of the Premier League table.”
Published on 12 November 2018"

You have allowed these 3 Mirror employees to use BT Sport to create the impression that Man City FC has done something wrong and that the achievements of the club have in some way been tainted.
You are no doubt aware of the club’s statement that these allegations are an organised attempt to damage their reputation and are based on purportedly stolen materials. You should also be further aware the source of Der Spiegel's leaks is a known extortionist.
BT has a legal and moral duty to ensure that unlawfully obtained documents are not used to make unsubstantiated allegations on its platform and you have failed to meet your obligations in this respect.
It is an indefensible editorial decision to allow these individuals air time to try to damage Man City and I would like an explanation of your conduct in this matter.
Was any payment made or received by BT for this reprehensible podcast?

Michael Calvin - enough said! This is the c*nt who was responsible for this utterly despicable piece some years back. He's done nothing but slag our owner off since day one, yet incredibly in this article he claims he should've invested in FC Scum instead:

His Highness, Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, wooed the wrong noisy neighbour.
Instead of blowing £1billion on Manchester City, he should have donated £1million to FC United.
He wouldn’t have been able to shape a club owned by the fans, for the fans.
But, for a relative pittance, he would have become a folk hero.
He would have helped expose the hypocrisy of the Glazers, the unfair burden of leveraged debt.
In so doing, football’s richest man would have discovered what football is all about.
The empowerment of a community, rather than the enrichment of opportunists.
Faith, defiance, and the credibility of commitment.
Passion, unprocessed and deliciously unrefined.
Joy, rather than empty rhetoric, and massaged opinion.
You don’t need advertising copywriters and simpering apologists to make a statement of intent.
Alienated Manchester United fans did that, when they formed a football club to give a human dimension to a protest movement.
Equally, the League pyramid cannot adequately measure the difference between City and FC United.
On paper it is seven Divisions. In essence the clubs are separated by a chasm, which separates constructive outrage and graceless vulgarity.
I defy anyone to watch a re-run of FC United’s FA Cup win at Rochdale without a smile. Players were stripped to homemade Superman underpants by euphoric fans.
They cavorted for the cameras in the dressing room, and promised not to turn up for work on Monday.
Their manager was wide eyed, and about to be legless. “We’ll have a couple of sherberts, here and there” he promised.
I’ll take Karl Marginson, before Roberto Mancini, any day of the week.
The FC United boss does need a personal website that is beyond parody.
“Roberto Mancini,” it croons. “The football. The class. The champion.”
Strange how it didn’t mention the cautious coach, the closet politician, and the cry baby.
Marginson used to be a milkman, reliant on boot money from the likes of Salford City and Bacup Borough.
You wouldn’t catch him posing for soft-focus photos, like a 10th-rate George Clooney.
Blue Moon Rising?
I prefer the red flares of class warriors, which illuminated Spotland’s Willbutts Lane Stand.
Money has siphoned innocence from football.
City’s purchasing power is intimidating, and intoxicating to outsiders.
I came across a caricature of a marketing executive late on Friday night.
He was worried my views would compromise his commercial relationship with Eastlands.
His type – swivel-eyed networkers who couldn’t spell the word integrity, let alone grasp its meaning – are everywhere.
I loathe what they represent, why they genuflect at the feet of the City hierarchy.
They are prepared to overlook the positive aspects of City’s problems.
Three successive defeats remind us that wealth is worthless, if used unwisely.
Briefings, and counter briefings, tell a cautionary tale of unchecked egos and unseemly ambition.
This is no time to sit on the fence. I once loved what City represented.
They were my “second” club as a schoolboy, an acceptable antidote to my chemical romance with Watford.
I wore the sky blue shirt, savoured the silly setbacks, and salivated at the skill of Colin Bell
To be fair, the new regime paid exemplary homage to Malcolm Allison.
The club tribute was simple, affecting, classy
But, with apologies to the vast majority of City fans who will understand my disillusion, let’s light the bonfire of the vanities.
I hope Mancini crashes and burns.
I pray FC United realise their impossible dream, a third round tie at Old Trafford.
And that someone, somewhere, has the courage to inform His Highness that he needs to act. Now!

 

[rice10]

195 posts, at least 3 of which have been in this thread since June 2009. If the three negative ones in here are anything to go by, what are your other posts like ?

Just askin'.

You could try reading them?

Is it not fair for me to ask questions about something I do not know the answers to?

I would love to be as confident as other people on this and by asking questions I hope to find out but you would rather act like an idiot and make me feel bad for asking a question.

 

[Blue Mist]

You could try reading them?

Is it not fair for me to ask questions about something I do not know the answers to?

I would love to be as confident as other people on this and by asking questions I hope to find out but you would rather act like an idiot and make me feel bad for asking a question.

As I stated I was only asking a question as the 3 comments on this thread are well, lets leave it there. If you are genuine there is no need to feel bad.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Many have said that if UEFA had not moved the goal posts City would have passed FFP first time round but would we have still passed FFP if UEFA knew that Sheikh Mansour was the one paying many of our sponsorships (assuming this to in fact be true)?

We were never going to pass FFP but, had UEFA not changed a key rule, we might have avoided sanctions. Had we done that and UEFA subsequently found out that we'd done things that would have disqualified us from using that rule had they known, then we might well be in trouble. But, ironically, changing it (whether intentionally or otherwise) caused us to be punished.

Since then they've changed the rules on owner investment, which was almost certainly their weak point legally and could well have been challenged under EU competition rules. We've also become profitable and self-sustaining mainly due to big increases in media income. Under those circumstances I find it difficult to believe that UEFA will re-open an old case, which could easily trigger a court challenge, merely because we may have failed by a bit more than we did fail by.