CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

"It can now be exclusively revealed that, as per documents obtained by Football Insider, a £50m related-party cap was proposed in the fine print of Project Big Picture, a 2020 plan to restructure the governance of English football."

...

"Project Big Picture was itself rejected in October 2020."
 
Norman kneejerk said:
I thought most of ours like Etihad were not related party.
Click to expand...
This original plan was rejected 18 months ago, with clubs complaining that the definition of a "Related Party" is too vague.

However it seems Newcastle's stellar season has sparked rival teams into cranking up this related party nonsense again.

They want the related party rules tightened up & more clearly defined, but the only clubs seemingly targeted are City & Newcastle. I wonder why?
 
Dribble said:
This original plan was rejected 18 months ago, with clubs complaining that the definition of a "Related Party" is too vague.

However it seems Newcastle's stellar season has sparked rival teams into cranking up this related party nonsense again.

They want the related party rules tightened up & more clearly defined, but the only clubs seemingly targeted are City & Newcastle. I wonder why?
Click to expand...
But surely it doesn’t much matter if Etihad are related (even though they aren’t) as no one can really argue that the Etihad sponsorship is above fair value.
 
JGL07 said:
But surely it doesn’t much matter if Etihad are related (even though they aren’t) as no one can really argue that the Etihad sponsorship is above fair value.
Click to expand...
In view of City & Chelsea being England's two most successful clubs over the past ten years, these are all very valid arguments.

HOWEVER, as you'll already know, common sense is in short supply when City are mentioned.

I'm tired of telling opposition fans that our owner could be worth a Gazillion quid, but he's still limited in what he can spend on our squad because of FFP.

This is where they believe being sponsored by companies based in the same country as the owner is an FFP scam.

This being the case, why aren't the USA owned clubs more heavily scrutinised for being sponsored by USA based companies?
 
Dribble said:
In view of City & Chelsea being England's two most successful clubs over the past ten years, these are all very valid arguments.

HOWEVER, as you'll already know, common sense is in short supply when City are mentioned.

I'm tired of telling opposition fans that our owner could be worth a Gazillion quid, but he's still limited in what he can spend on our squad because of FFP.

This is where they believe being sponsored by companies based in the same country as the owner is an FFP scam.

This being the case, why aren't the USA owned clubs more heavily scrutinised for being sponsored by USA based companies?
Click to expand...
Absolutely, have every faith in the club after beating UEFA despite our friend Evans from the Independent reminding us UEFA lawyers never lost a case.
 
pauls said:
Absolutely, have every faith in the club after beating UEFA despite our friend Evans from the Independent reminding us UEFA lawyers never lost a case.
Click to expand...
It's crazy! When you look at what FFP was meant to achieve, & whose progress it was supposed to impede, look at the clubs who're most in debt. It's all the same bent bastards who dreamt up FFP to stop City!
 
Kakhaber The Great said:
View attachment 82565
Click to expand...
Slightly of topic, but Arsenal in our early days in ADUG ownership where amongst the most critical of our spending ability, notably through Wenger. Despite this criticism there was little rage from him when our new owners were to sign away the cheques for something like £80 million for Adebayor, Kolo Toure and Nasri. If he didn't want the ArseNil coffers to be boosted by clearing the decks, he only ever had to say NO.
 
Dribble said:
In view of City & Chelsea being England's two most successful clubs over the past ten years, these are all very valid arguments.

HOWEVER, as you'll already know, common sense is in short supply when City are mentioned.

I'm tired of telling opposition fans that our owner could be worth a Gazillion quid, but he's still limited in what he can spend on our squad because of FFP.

This is where they believe being sponsored by companies based in the same country as the owner is an FFP scam.

This being the case, why aren't the USA owned clubs more heavily scrutinised for being sponsored by USA based companies?
Click to expand...
..not only the Americans.. perhaps a tad more scrutiny might be applied to German clubs and their owners/sponsorships?

For example, and picking this out purely at random*, there is one club of which 25% of its ownership was bought and divided in equal measure between the German companies Adidas, Allianz and Audi, which at sum injected a huge amount of capital into the club and its shareholding.

Said companies also provide multimillion sponsorships to said club, having done so already for many, many years (eg Allianz 130M euros for stadium naming rights between 2023 and 2033; and Adidas 900M euros for kit sponsorship between 2015 and 2030)

Nothing really wrong with all that in my book, nor do I doubt that it's all above board legally**

Just saying, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander..

(* I jest, of course.. it's our Bavarian chums with the board members with criminal records!)

(** But it would be nice to have some authority or other to check the numbers in some depth, just to make sure, what with all those pesky criminal records that abound at the club?!)
 
johnevans said:
..not only the Americans.. perhaps a tad more scrutiny might be applied to German clubs and their owners/sponsorships?

For example, and picking this out purely at random*, there is one club of which 25% of its ownership was bought and divided in equal measure between the German companies Adidas, Allianz and Audi, which at sum injected a huge amount of capital into the club and its shareholding.

Said companies also provide multimillion sponsorships to said club, having done so already for many, many years (eg Allianz 130M euros for stadium naming rights between 2023 and 2033; and Adidas 900M euros for kit sponsorship between 2015 and 2030)

Nothing really wrong with all that in my book, nor do I doubt that it's all above board legally**

Just saying, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander..

(* I jest, of course.. it's our Bavarian chums with the board members with criminal records!)

(** But it would be nice to have some authority or other to check the numbers in some depth, just to make sure, what with all those pesky criminal records that abound at the club?!)
Click to expand...
Mate, Bayern receive nearly £400m PER SEASON from that lot, who're also shareholders!

If Sheikh Mansour was to do the same, we'd be thrown out the PL & CL!

This is why the PL are shitting themselves at the thought of government intervention & regulation, & UK courts being the ultimate arbiter.

This lot are lucky SM is such a nice & peaceable bloke! If it was me, it'd be fuckin out & out warfare mate! :-)
 
I'm no cynic but... said:
Slightly of topic, but Arsenal in our early days in ADUG ownership where amongst the most critical of our spending ability, notably through Wenger. Despite this criticism there was little rage from him when our new owners were to sign away the cheques for something like £80 million for Adebayor, Kolo Toure and Nasri. If he didn't want the ArseNil coffers to be boosted by clearing the decks, he only ever had to say NO.
Click to expand...
We basically paid for their fucking stadium, the debt from which was until then stopping them buying anyone. Hypocritical cunts - Wenger had us bent over with our pants down on those deals then had the cheek to cry victim over it. Cunts.
 
johnevans said:
..not only the Americans.. perhaps a tad more scrutiny might be applied to German clubs and their owners/sponsorships?

For example, and picking this out purely at random*, there is one club of which 25% of its ownership was bought and divided in equal measure between the German companies Adidas, Allianz and Audi, which at sum injected a huge amount of capital into the club and its shareholding.

Said companies also provide multimillion sponsorships to said club, having done so already for many, many years (eg Allianz 130M euros for stadium naming rights between 2023 and 2033; and Adidas 900M euros for kit sponsorship between 2015 and 2030)

Nothing really wrong with all that in my book, nor do I doubt that it's all above board legally**

Just saying, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander..

(* I jest, of course.. it's our Bavarian chums with the board members with criminal records!)

(** But it would be nice to have some authority or other to check the numbers in some depth, just to make sure, what with all those pesky criminal records that abound at the club?!)
Click to expand...

Leverkusen and Wolfsburg both have their owners as sponsors….
 
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