Champions League ban?

You'd have to know where to look but it's there.
I think you have to want to look — aside from you and a handful of others, most “reporters” trying to bring information to the forefront via public writing are focusing only on the potentially damaging aspects (even if they do not hold up to further scrutiny), as it is what 1) garners clicks (and thus ad revenue), 2) fits their agenda, 3) gains them more notoriety.
 
He's not the Messiah.................
And it's Handel.

It was also played at the Queen's (Gawd bless her) coronation.
As was Zadok the Priest which was referenced by John Peel on his Desert Island Discs.
 
Football journalists often don't understand it. It's not what their career has been about. The same applies among journalists in other sports. It's not even that much of a criticism, it's just not something they've ever had to deal with. The problem is with those who don't understand it and still pontificate as though they do.

It’s just like any other job. They report on sport under ‘normal’ circumstances they report an games in this instance. Along comes all this other stuff they have never really had to get to grips with and the boss says write about it and suddenly you are caught out and you can’t say’sorry guv don’t understand it’ because you are out the door so, in most cases, you waffle and take the easy route because your boss doesn’t have a clue either. Why should you ‘rock’ the boat and dig for the truth when you are following the party line and everyone is happy?
 
It’s just like any other job. They report on sport under ‘normal’ circumstances they report an games in this instance. Along comes all this other stuff they have never really had to get to grips with and the boss says write about it and suddenly you are caught out and you can’t say’sorry guv don’t understand it’ because you are out the door so, in most cases, you waffle and take the easy route because your boss doesn’t have a clue either. Why should you ‘rock’ the boat and dig for the truth when you are following the party line and everyone is happy?
I can confirm that when it comes to finances and the related laws and regs 99.9% of sports journalists don't have a fucking scooby. Exceptions being possibly Samuels as he bothered to educate himself and Marcotti as he got a crash course from me on Twitter.
 
You'd have to know where to look but it's there.

I may be wrong about this because I don't really keep up with the minutiae of the FFP rules. I just read your stuff instead. ;)

Anyway, I thought that UEFA had changed the related party rule a while back to cover the City 'dodge' - something along the lines that if you receive income from a state authority or state-owned company from a country of which your owner is a citizen, that's also subject to a fair value test. Have I imagined that?
 
It’s just like any other job. They report on sport under ‘normal’ circumstances they report an games in this instance. Along comes all this other stuff they have never really had to get to grips with and the boss says write about it and suddenly you are caught out and you can’t say’sorry guv don’t understand it’ because you are out the door so, in most cases, you waffle and take the easy route because your boss doesn’t have a clue either. Why should you ‘rock’ the boat and dig for the truth when you are following the party line and everyone is happy?

They also have delusions of grandeur. They all think they're Woodward and Bernstein. I've had many a discussion with them before about quite why they believe they're so important.
 
I may be wrong about this because I don't really keep up with the minutiae of the FFP rules. I just read your stuff instead. ;)

Anyway, I thought that UEFA had changed the related party rule a while back to cover the City 'dodge' - something along the lines that if you receive income from a state authority or state-owned company from a country of which your owner is a citizen, that's also subject to a fair value test. Have I imagined that?
Even if they did all our sponsorships fly through fair value tests these days.
 
Even if they did all our sponsorships fly through fair value tests these days.

Yes, I don't have any worries that we'd have the values of sponsorships reduced. I just wondered whether there was any opportunity to argue that UEFA have in effect recognised our UAE sponsorships to be of a fair value in the last year or two.
 
Yes, I don't have any worries that we'd have the values of sponsorships reduced. I just wondered whether there was any opportunity to argue that UEFA have in effect recognised our UAE sponsorships to be of a fair value in the last year or two.
I don't know about the last couple of years, but David Conn seems sure they did in 2014 and he rarely speaks well of anything involving City and Abu Dhabi.
 
Unfortunately the computer I was using back in 2014 is no longer with us and most of the information on it was lost. This lost information includes almost everything relating the our "FFP crisis" especially the text of the settlement and of City's statement. I rely on my feelings and reactions back in 2014 for this post but I was amazed when I read City's statement. I thought UEFA would not impose any sanctions, mainly because I believed we had complied with the regulations but also because the regulations were clearly a denial of the right to invest which UEFA would not wish to expose to a court case. My first reaction was anger and a wish for vengeance but, when I read the club's statement, I saw things in a completely different light. There was no hint of remorse in City's tone, rather it gave the impression of lecturing UEFA that the "pinch" was all City would tolerate, then and for all times. When I read what else had been agreed I was furious at the CL squad limitation (which really was ineffective because we were scraping the barrel in those days to fill squad places) but I couldn't believe what UEFA had agreed to, especially with regard to CFG. This, unfortunately, is where my memory is no longer as good as it was so the details are vague/forgotten.

I concluded that UEFA had been completely bamboozled by our club's negotiators and lawyers and that City had agreed to the "pinch" to get UEFA's acceptance of the massive expansion of the club and the group that ADUG had planned. In the light of PB's earlier posts on this thread I now accept his assertions that it was UEFA who were desperate for a settlement to avoid a legal challenge while saving face, because they feel they are highly unlikely to withstand a legal challenge and wished to settle the matter once and for all.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.