The club response to the NYT article today, is IMO, our "crossing the Rubicon" moment in the fight against UEFA/Corrupt officials. By that, I mean, we appear to have committed to a specific course of action and there can only be one winner. From a legal standpoint that cannot be UEFA. By the NYT citing "people familiar with the case" in their report as the source, the CFCB ICs investigation is; either not independent nor committed to due process or that process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both. As the "people familiar with the case" would have to come from one of these sources, or both.
The statement says what we all know has been happening with their agenda against us but this is now pointed out in clear legal fact.That is fighting talk from City and i'm pretty sure there will be a lot of back tracking from UEFA as someone has made a big error in judgement on their side. Continuing with the military theme this might just be our El Alamein moment.
'Manchester City FC is fully cooperating in good faith with the CFCB IC's ongoing investigation.
'In doing so the club is reliant on both the CFCB IC's independence and commitment to due process; and on UEFA's commitment of the 7th of March that it '….will make no further comment on the matter while the investigation is ongoing'.
'The New York Times report citing 'people familiar with the case' is therefore extremely concerning.
'The implications are that either Manchester City's good faith in the CFCB IC is misplaced or the CFCB IC process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both.
'Manchester City's published accounts are full and complete and a matter of legal and regulatory record.
'The accusation of financial irregularities are entirely false, and comprehensive proof of this fact has been provided to the CFCB IC.'
