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

[LongsightM13]

Do you know if this email the DM are using falls under one of those categories?

No idea mate, sorry. I do know it was examined by CAS, I remember reading it previously

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Smear attacks like this won’t ever stop. Nick Harris has got a hard on at the minute, I can’t for us to be cleared again and that **** crawls back under his rock.

 

[mrbelfry]

Wasn't this email one that was discussed at CAS? If the MoS have corroborating documents then let's see those as well please. But for goodness sake the figures being discussed are less than we spent on Mangala. Where was our advantage?

 

[goater1985]

So they've published a few articles, but this one is like out of a fanfiction.

The day Man City's plea to hide Premier League inquiry was dismantled

EXCLUSIVE REPORT BY DANIEL MATTHEWS: For years, only a few crumbs of detail emerged about the secret battle between Manchester City over their alleged violation of Financial Fair Play rules.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I'd recommend you all get in your bunkers for the next few days, it's going to be loud.

Embrace it my friend. Not the first or last.

 

[117 M34]

Sponsorship was judged to be fair value by uefa themselves.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I've no intention of reading anything that obsessed and bitter lunatic writes but, if I remember rightly, he claimed at the time of the CAS hearing that Etihad were paying us far more than the amount in the contract. He claimed they'd paid us £220m over 3 years, making the deal worth £75m a year.

In fact, he'd missed out a year, one that UEFA didn't investigate (2014/15 or the following year, from memory). It wasn't explicitly stated why but my guess was that we staggered the payments, taking more than the annual contracted amount in those 3 years but less (if anything at all) in the unreported year.

In other words, Etihad may have contracted to pay us £55m a year but that didn't mean we couldn't vary the amount in any individual year to suit our needs. So in 2012/13, when we were trying to meet the first assessment, we needed more money after sacking Mancini and paying him out £20m contractual severance. Yet CAS were clear that the contractual relationship with Etihad had been met, with Etihad having received full value for their sponsorship.

 

[LongsightM13]

Nick Harris is the bellend who made up a wild paranoid fantasy on a podcast involving City fans supposedly driving all the way up to his house in the wilds of Scotland and putting his windows through. He is a damaged and deranged individual and probably needs protecting from himself more than he does from fictional blue vandals

 

[tweety]

Quoting sponsorship deals from 2010, ffp didn't even exist then. These smear tactics are getting out of hand, it's about time that the club shows some balls and goes after these cunts.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I've not read it and won't be but I've answered what I presume he's foaming at the mouth about in the Media thread.

To summarise, if the contract with Etihad was for £50m per annum, it doesn't mean that they paid us exactly that same sum every year, as long as it averaged out to £50m a year over the length of the contract.

CAS were happy we accounted for it correctly.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Nick Harris is the bellend who made up a wild paranoid fantasy on a podcast involving City fans supposedly driving all the way up to his house in the wilds of Scotland and putting his windows through. He is a damaged and deranged individual and probably needs protecting from himself more than he does from fictional blue vandals

Just shows you how low of a standard the Daily Mail have when the employ the likes of him. You’ve got Martin Samuel who has been fair towards City for years but also not to bias and then you get Harris who has a clear agenda against us.