Manchester_lalala
Well-Known Member
Yep...I don't think the media would be mentioning 'Dirty Oil Money' or 'Arab Money' if Sheikh Mansour had bought the Rags or Dippers
I don’t think that has anything to do with racism.
Yep...I don't think the media would be mentioning 'Dirty Oil Money' or 'Arab Money' if Sheikh Mansour had bought the Rags or Dippers
I posted previously - Bayern are part owned by Adidas and Allianz... PART OWNED... Bayern have a £900mil kit deal with Adidas and over £150mil sponsorship with Allianz... now, is it just me, but is that not sponsoring yourself? Is that not worse that what they are accusing us of?
Add to that Rummenigge, Beckenbauer and Hoeness have all been done (or accused of) finacial wrong-doings... Hoeness was put away for it ffs!
They are reporting everything in such a sensationalist way it is hard to take seriously.One thing that has struck me in all this is how everything that Der Spiegel has published is being taken as gospel. At no point has anyone in the media questioned the validity of the claims (which let's not forget were illegally obtained) or asked who has leaked them, or why. You know, actual journalism rather than just rehashing another publication's stories.
We've seemingly been tried and convicted in their eyes, before we've even had the chance to formulate our official response. So much for innocent until proven guilty, eh.
Matthew Syed admitted to cheating against Desmond Douglas
https://tabletennisengland.co.uk/news/featured-news/matthew-syed-admits-one-of-his-biggest-regrets/
I don’t think that has anything to do with racism.
Are you sure you're not thinking of the script to Pulp Fiction there?Bayern's president Hoeness was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison for tax evasion and their chairman Rummenigge was fined 250,000 Euros for smuggling watches.
Sounds like classic Blackadder!As I understand it, no. The sponsorship money came from Aabar, irrespective of whatever was the ultimate origin of £12m of it. The contractual obligation to pay was Aabar's. Aabar was the sponsor, not anyone else. Again, the FFPR could have adopted a 'look-through' or 'ultimate beneficial owner' test, to the question of related party transactions which would have caught the situation you mention: but they didn't. They adopted IAS24 without qualification. Der Spiegel are basically criticising City for being in breach of the rules they think UEFA should with the benefit of hindsight have imposed, even though City (if the emails are genuine) didn't actually breach the rules that UEFA did put in place.
It's anti City...They don't care who owns us
ThanksAs I understand it, no. The sponsorship money came from Aabar, irrespective of whatever was the ultimate origin of £12m of it. The contractual obligation to pay was Aabar's. Aabar was the sponsor, not anyone else. Again, the FFPR could have adopted a 'look-through' or 'ultimate beneficial owner' test, to the question of related party transactions which would have caught the situation you mention: but they didn't. They adopted IAS24 without qualification. Der Spiegel are basically criticising City for being in breach of the rules they think UEFA should with the benefit of hindsight have imposed, even though City (if the emails are genuine) didn't actually breach the rules that UEFA did put in place.