I suppose misleading is a large term extending all the way from slight exaggeration to outright lies. See the Chilcot report for example.I agree. If my guess is right, UEFA will find us guilty of misleading, but, logically, if what was actually done was ok, this is UEFA stretching a point.. But they are under pressure from the cartel..
It is, all clubs sign up to provide full information. They’re inferring we haven’t.A charge that isn't in the rules?
Fair enough.It is, all clubs sign up to provide full information. They’re inferring we haven’t.
Point3- surely ADEC putting money into the state-run airline is as perfectly legitimate as any government subsidising a struggling nationalised entity,Here's what I think happened. No direct evidence, just my guess reading between the lines.
1. Etihad was making big losses and got worried that they could not fulfil the terms of the sponsorship.
2 They discussed it with City, setting off City execs brainstorming what could be done. Stupidly those execs committed some of the discussions to email. We were foolish to consider gaming the rules and bonkers to write it down.
3 Khaldoon stepped in, had a word with his mates on AD Executive Council.
ADEC then bunged Etihad to cover the losses and give them enough to fulfil their obligations.
4 Etihad then
paid us "wholly from their own resources "
5 The timing of 3 above vis a vis Uefa asking us questions may be an issue. We may have winged it a bit in anticipation of Etihad getting the bung.
6 We, therefore did not break the rules.
7 Will 5 above sustain a charge of misleading UEFA .?
Probably.......
And stop with this shite as well. UEFA are governed by Swiss law which allows evidence that has been obtained illegally if in the public interest.
Your much repeated “fruit of the poisoned tree” bollocks is American and not remotely relevant in this instance. How many people have to repeat this to you before you start to understand it?
Der Spiegel started they would pass the material over to the relevant bodies not that it matters.You have a point re the difference in Swiss Law and US Law but as I understand it UEFA don't actually have the evidence - however obtained.... just third party knowledge of it. I'm not sure under any legal system that's good grounds to prosecute anybody.
Maybe they do have the emails but they’re just misleading us that they don’t.You have a point re the difference in Swiss Law and US Law but as I understand it UEFA don't actually have the evidence - however obtained.... just third party knowledge of it. I'm not sure under any legal system that's good grounds to prosecute anybody.
Yes, perfectly legit.Point3- surely ADEC putting money into the state-run airline is as perfectly legitimate as any government subsidising a struggling nationalised entity,
and it is no concern of uefa what that entity does with its money.