PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Prestwich_Blue said:
First off, the PL would have to prove it was a sham. It didn't have to be Mancini personally delivering the consultancy so even if they had evidence he never spoke to anyone at Al Jazira, that's not in itself proof. It could have been David Platt, Lombardo or anyone else who was suitably qualified, even if they had no connection with City.

Second, great play was made of the supposed fact that we paid him more via Al Jazira (£1.75m pa) than via City (£1.45m). But this was a misleading comparison as his City contract was heavily incentivised, so by winning the FA Cup and getting top 4, he received far more than that base £1.45m

Finally, if the PL allege it was fraudulent and designed to hide expenses from the accounts, we'd simply point to the scale of our losses at that time (which totalled around £350m in the years that Mancini was manager) and ask why we'd want to hide less than £6m. If it was the difference between profit and loss, or passing or failing FFP, then there might be a case but the amounts involved are completely immaterial compared to the level of losses we were reporting.

It's a complete red herring and the PL bringing it into the charges seems to reinforce the view that they're throwing any little thing at us, however irrelevant it is. It's the optics of the charges that are more damaging than the actuality.

We can probably take comfort from the fact that if they thought they had us bang to rights on the potentially far more serious and material sponsorship issues, they wouldn't need to bother with the Mancini stuff.

My guess is that there was some tax advantage for Mancini in this arrangement and that many foreign managers in England have some sort of similar arrangement. There was certainly no advantage to us.
Click to expand...

Ive thought the opposite with the Mancini issue and thought that’d be the hardest one for us to defend. That’s based on the leaked emails not being amended in any way though.
 
asahartford1 said:
If Jordan has heard that City are not confident, then he has heard it from someone. He must believe that the information he has heard has credibility, because he has aired it on a National radio station.
If he has not made it up then he has the "knowledge" of what that person has told him
Personally I don't believe a word Jordan says. He believes and wants other people to believe he is intelligent and in the "know"
I have listened to his bull over many years, many times he is completely wrong, has to backtrap or deny he has actually said something that is totally erroneous.
Click to expand...

He just another thick Goldfish.
 
ashytheblue said:
Sat in kings Lynn weatherspoons and over hearing a conversation.... apparently we are fucked because our Saudi owners will leave when we get relegated..... hahahaha....and this is good news for utd cos they will finish top 4.......I'm laughing to myself
Click to expand...
The amount of people who say they know all about the charges and City then start with "your Saudi owners" is magnificent.
 
ashytheblue said:
Sat in kings Lynn weatherspoons and over hearing a conversation.... apparently we are fucked because our Saudi owners will leave when we get relegated..... hahahaha....and this is good news for utd cos they will finish top 4.......I'm laughing to myself
Click to expand...
Obviously didn't study geography at school - that is, if they actually attended school.
 
Talksport presenters will say that they have heard something. What they say they have heard will be the thing most likely to attract attention, listeners, and clicks. That will include positive stories about Liverpool and Manchester United, and negative stories about their rivals (us). The presenters will not reveal their sources, naturally, but I suspect they don't have one anyway. It doesn't matter because there is absolutely no recourse for misinformation - their only objective is advertising revenue which is based on those listener figures.
 
oldius said:
Talksport presenters will say that they have heard something. What they say they have heard will be the thing most likely to attract attention, listeners, and clicks. That will include positive stories about Liverpool and Manchester United, and negative stories about their rivals (us). The presenters will not reveal their sources, naturally, but I suspect they don't have one anyway. It doesn't matter because there is absolutely no recourse for misinformation - their only objective is advertising revenue which is based on those listener figures.
Click to expand...
remember when goldbridge said that he had received a letter from city and he was going to read it on his talksport show, no letter, no nothing, they are consistently full of crap
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
First off, the PL would have to prove it was a sham. It didn't have to be Mancini personally delivering the consultancy so even if they had evidence he never spoke to anyone at Al Jazira, that's not in itself proof. It could have been David Platt, Lombardo or anyone else who was suitably qualified, even if they had no connection with City.

Second, great play was made of the supposed fact that we paid him more via Al Jazira (£1.75m pa) than via City (£1.45m). But this was a misleading comparison as his City contract was heavily incentivised, so by winning the FA Cup and getting top 4, he received far more than that base £1.45m

Finally, if the PL allege it was fraudulent and designed to hide expenses from the accounts, we'd simply point to the scale of our losses at that time (which totalled around £350m in the years that Mancini was manager) and ask why we'd want to hide less than £6m. If it was the difference between profit and loss, or passing or failing FFP, then there might be a case but the amounts involved are completely immaterial compared to the level of losses we were reporting.

It's a complete red herring and the PL bringing it into the charges seems to reinforce the view that they're throwing any little thing at us, however irrelevant it is. It's the optics of the charges that are more damaging than the actuality.

We can probably take comfort from the fact that if they thought they had us bang to rights on the potentially far more serious and material sponsorship issues, they wouldn't need to bother with the Mancini stuff.

My guess is that there was some tax advantage for Mancini in this arrangement and that many foreign managers in England have some sort of similar arrangement. There was certainly no advantage to us.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that. Plus the key witnesses (Mancini and the Al Jazira CEO (an established sports exec)) are either not giving evidence or have publicly endorsed that the arrangement was genuine.
 
asahartford1 said:
If Jordan has heard that City are not confident, then he has heard it from someone. He must believe that the information he has heard has credibility, because he has aired it on a National radio station.
If he has not made it up then he has the "knowledge" of what that person has told him
Personally I don't believe a word Jordan says. He believes and wants other people to believe he is intelligent and in the "know"
I have listened to his bull over many years, many times he is completely wrong, has to backtrap or deny he has actually said something that is totally erroneous.
Click to expand...
He (and the information) may be wrong. But he isn't lying (IMO).
 
If reports are to believed the rebuild has started 2 cbs for €80m 18 and 20 and a young forward for another €50m also the young Argentinian we have signed this month!! I'd imagine this is only the start not really the actions of a club fearing relegation?? Don't know if the PL could sanction us with a transfer ban though?
 
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