Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

OB1 said:
Doubt that anything illegal has been done and certainly not by City. City have invoiced Etihad for the sponsorship received. Etihad may have invoiced ADUG but again, that is not illegal.

The fact remains that UEFA cannot check Etihad's books to see if rules have been contravened.
Click to expand...
I'm no lawyer, but I'm certain that there is no illegality. However, I would like to see City have this out with UEFA in the courts to establish once and for all whether the owner of a football business (City) can invest their funds in that business. FFP 'rules' do not accord with the capitalist west - they're like something out of the old USSR. UEFA is just a commercial business - not some governmental body.
 
Personally, I don't think UEFA would want to see us in the courts - they would be trying to defend the indefensible. My guess is that SM would hire a lawyer to tear apart the 'legality' of FFP.
 
The agitators, i.e the cartel ( mainly BM and the Germans) are getting desperate with all this stuff because nothing has come of it and nothing will and the leaks crew and all those driving the agenda are just hashing stuff from 5-6 years ago.
Then you have some media lap it up and make it a "concrete" case..laughable. Idiots like Rob Draper talking through his arse because he can't stand us, making false claims that we "will be punished" and a "ban is a step closer"... whilst ignoring the fact that FFP is illegal in the first place with deceptive motives at it's core.
Like the club states "We will not be providing any comment on out-of-context materials purported to have been hacked or stolen from City Football Group and City personnel and associated people. The attempt to damage the club's reputation is clear."
UEFA cannot touch us, the consequences would be dire because the evidence is questionable, out of context not to mention obtained illegally..
UEFA know we won't be taking "a pinch anymore' and if they tried anything we would take this to court and make a meal out of the whole bent system.
 
HarrytheBlue said:
I'm no lawyer, but I'm certain that there is no illegality. However, I would like to see City have this out with UEFA in the courts to establish once and for all whether the owner of a football business (City) can invest their funds in that business. FFP 'rules' do not accord with the capitalist west - they're like something out of the old USSR. UEFA is just a commercial business - not some governmental body.
Click to expand...

It's not clear whether or not FFP would hold up in court but my own view is that it is anti-competitive and some form of restraint of trade. I find it hard to believe that if UEFA try to use this material to ban City from European competition that City's owners would not get litigious and they have deeper pockets than UEFA.

The whole thing is very tiresome because City have demonstrated how to make investment work.
 
I thought u was allowed related sponsorship if they were deemed fair value??
If that is the case what does it matter if sheikh Mansour was funnelling the money back to the sponsors?

Didn't PSG try getting away with a £200m sponsor from Qatar tourism board??.....UEFA deemed £100m was fair value??

Why didn't City ever have a £100m deal with Abu Dhabi tourism board?
 
I voted Remain, but UEFA is a bit like the European Commission - funded by its component parts. Occasionally, both bodies make sensible decisions, but occasionally both make irrational decisions. Does a commercial business (UEFA) really have the legal right to dictate how a member (us) of one of its associations (the FA) runs its commercial business ? Being devil's advocate, how can UEFA find fault with a debt free business (us) but give its blessing to clubs like MU that are hundreds of millions in debt ? In reality, I believe that MU should be allowed to pursue their 'heavy debt' business model and we should be allowed to pursue our 'debt free' model. Businesses come and go and go out of business. Fact of life.
 
Last edited:
OB1 said:
It's not clear whether or not FFP would hold up in court but my own view is that it is anti-competitive and some form of restraint of trade. I find it hard to believe that if UEFA try to use this material to ban City from European competition that City's owners would not get litigious and they have deeper pockets than UEFA.

The whole thing is very tiresome because City have demonstrated how to make investment work.
Click to expand...
pretty sure uefa wouldnt want to take the risk, if they did and lost thats end of fpp, cant see them risking all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OB1
dickie davies said:
Illegal in these terms is by breaking UEFA's rules
A bit like a tackle in a football match which is deemed illegal
Click to expand...
The word 'illegal' is defined in my dictionary as being 'forbidden in law'. Surely, this comes down to whether the commercial entity/business known as UEFA can bring in rules that have legal force. Just my opinion - I don't think they can.

Come on City, lets have this out with UEFA in the courts once and for all.
 
bobmcfc said:
When you say illegal do you mean criminally so or just breaking Uefa rules ? Allegedly
Click to expand...
For the fiftieth time "His Highness" isn't Sheik Mansour, it is the Emir. Sheikh Mansour is "His Highness Sheikh Mansour ". Simon Pearce WOULD NEVER have made such a protocol faux pas in a billion years by calling Sheikh Mansour "His Highness"!
 
Last edited:
OB1 said:
The whole thing is very tiresome because City have demonstrated how to make investment work.
Click to expand...
That's the whole problem, its broken something that was essentially "fixed" for a few.

I really hope we win the CL this year, and then let them try and ban us, it would be hilarious if the cup holders were banned, it would completely devalue any credibility they still have.
 
They really are gunning for us aren’t they?
There wasn’t this much effort into Chelsea’s scandal, they did it, they got banned and no one gave a shit.

City might get banned? Better talk about it as much as possible and speculate why and how and what the punishment should be.

The mainstream media are all a bunch of ****s.
TMMAABOC
 
New or re-hashed stuff? I just can't get my head around these leaked emails. Firstly which daft twats at City were emailing such highly sensitive info & secondly who the f*ck are City employing to secure their network & look after I.T. security?

I'm assuming Der Spiegel have more of this sh*t & will release it at the most damaging times, for example before the summer transfer window opens.

If the club persists with their passive approach then wank outlets like The Daily Mail will continue to stick the boot in. Remember when Elton John sued The Sun ... The newspaper s left him alone after that. Nobody will leave us alone until the club make an example of somebody with SERIOUS legal action.

Meanwhile PSG can do whatever they like it seems ....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...got-UEFA-rules.html?__twitter_impression=true
 
Honestly this pap doesn’t worry me. Been trying for ages. If they have something genuine, it will come out. I’d like to think it would galvanise us if so.
 
I see that @Ric and @Gary James are having it out with Duncan “The Empty” Castles and Nick “It” Harris on Twitter about DS’ constant targeted “analysis” and “leak” drip and their sycophantic coverage of it.

Well done to you both.

Though, you may want to save your energy and reallocate your time, as it is like playing tennis with a stone wall (and both of them are about as intelligent as one, as well).
 
Emails' in 2009. FFP came to plan in principle September 2009 and its regulations sorted for use in 2011.

I assume you can't retrospect legal action in most legal cases unless up agreed upon in the clause by powers that be during the regulations draft to include retrospective action.
 
Just wanted to say that Der Spiegel translates to The Mirror in English so it's not a surprise that their journalistic standards are down the shitter.
 
City issued a statement on Saturday night saying: 'We will not be providing any comment on out-of-context materials purported to have been hacked or stolen from City Football Group and City personnel and associated people. The attempt to damage the club's reputation is clear.'

This has been the same statement issued before. Nothing has come off it till now.

Any idea what will be happening going forward.
 
I have it on good authority that City suspected someone was hacking their email system so deliberately fabricated some “illegal” activity and emailed about it to flush out the hackers.

Seems to have worked a treat.
 
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