oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
Some twat named Gill ??
FIFA to investigate City over relationship with Danish club?
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
This will come to nothing but that is not the point, The G14 or whoever, is ensuring there is constant negativity surrounding the club, anything and everything that can be thrown at us will be. The owners prefer to do things quietly and professionally and I assume they will not like all this negative publicity but I have no answers to how it is stopped. Winning the quadruple will only add to the furore with these bastard so perhaps the club need to start fighting back instead of playing the patient game.
The blue phantom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 8,743
We've got Infantino working for us so we should be fine.
bluetonium
Well-Known Member
Having read a bit more into this, and still not sure what this evidence actually is. Maybe there is more to it that I can see, but from what I can actually see it seems to be much ado about nothing.
A Danish newspaper called Politiken claims we have a clause in our agreement with a Danish club obliging them to use their 'best endeavours' to make a transfer happen of any of their African players to city, should we want them.
Firstly, I doubt that this wording is exclusive to city in such agreements with other clubs.
Secondly, we can argue that agreement easily as being a first refusal type expectation (in the event of two clubs offering the same, city's offer should be preferred due to the relationship between the clubs, but still doesn't mean the player ends up at city, he isn't ours by default), there is no depth or explanation as to what 'best endeavours' actually means they should be doing in relation to city's interest in a player. In an industry where gazumping and verbal agreements/disccussions on transfers are common, where offers can be accepted by clubs one day and then rejected the next, I don't this that 'best endeavours' is unreasonable. And in this case I really don't believe it actually means 'at a knockdown rate' either, which is what must be being implied.
Thirdly, the connection of 3rd party ownership here by city is not clearly demonstrated, either legally or, i would also say, even suggestively. At no point do we own a player or service belonging to the Danish club, in fact the contract seems to suggest we would be expected to pay for it. At no point in the contract, or at least in the extremely selective sentences that I can see, does it suggest the Danish club have to cede ownership of an asset to city or will be expected to waive what is due to them.
So the suggestion is therefore that this Danish club are mcfc with a mask on, operating mostly or even purely for the gain of man city. If that is the case then maybe UEFA are duty bound to investigate, and I am pretty sure that both ours and their books, plus the contract itself, won't show that only city are getting something out of this deal.
At some point these false allegations, or at the very least this over-sensationilsing of city's operations, will have to be accountable for a loss of income, damage to our reputation and even potential legal fees. Maybe that will make such media outlets think to be more sure of their sources and material before putting a very flimsy boot in.
A Danish newspaper called Politiken claims we have a clause in our agreement with a Danish club obliging them to use their 'best endeavours' to make a transfer happen of any of their African players to city, should we want them.
Firstly, I doubt that this wording is exclusive to city in such agreements with other clubs.
Secondly, we can argue that agreement easily as being a first refusal type expectation (in the event of two clubs offering the same, city's offer should be preferred due to the relationship between the clubs, but still doesn't mean the player ends up at city, he isn't ours by default), there is no depth or explanation as to what 'best endeavours' actually means they should be doing in relation to city's interest in a player. In an industry where gazumping and verbal agreements/disccussions on transfers are common, where offers can be accepted by clubs one day and then rejected the next, I don't this that 'best endeavours' is unreasonable. And in this case I really don't believe it actually means 'at a knockdown rate' either, which is what must be being implied.
Thirdly, the connection of 3rd party ownership here by city is not clearly demonstrated, either legally or, i would also say, even suggestively. At no point do we own a player or service belonging to the Danish club, in fact the contract seems to suggest we would be expected to pay for it. At no point in the contract, or at least in the extremely selective sentences that I can see, does it suggest the Danish club have to cede ownership of an asset to city or will be expected to waive what is due to them.
So the suggestion is therefore that this Danish club are mcfc with a mask on, operating mostly or even purely for the gain of man city. If that is the case then maybe UEFA are duty bound to investigate, and I am pretty sure that both ours and their books, plus the contract itself, won't show that only city are getting something out of this deal.
At some point these false allegations, or at the very least this over-sensationilsing of city's operations, will have to be accountable for a loss of income, damage to our reputation and even potential legal fees. Maybe that will make such media outlets think to be more sure of their sources and material before putting a very flimsy boot in.
Pablo ZZZ Peroni
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 May 2014
- Messages
- 2,489
Here is the link to the original Politiken article:
https://politiken.dk/sport/fodbold/...-talents-at-Danish-top-flight-club-–-for-free
A good way down is an extract from the contract:
3.1 is subject to clause 3.5 but they don't show clause 3.5. I wonder why?
3.4 mentions "subject always to the regulations of FIFA and football authorities"
I suspect this is again complete bollocks. I can't imagine in 2016 City would fall foul of the regulations here.
https://politiken.dk/sport/fodbold/...-talents-at-Danish-top-flight-club-–-for-free
A good way down is an extract from the contract:
3.1 is subject to clause 3.5 but they don't show clause 3.5. I wonder why?
3.4 mentions "subject always to the regulations of FIFA and football authorities"
I suspect this is again complete bollocks. I can't imagine in 2016 City would fall foul of the regulations here.
lionellettuce
Well-Known Member
when qatar get the wold cup who needs investigating?
1961_vintage
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 15,345
High time we went after this Gill fella.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Wouldn’t be surprised if he’s behind this investigation just to prove he’s not in our pockets despite us knowing the only reason he semi-pacified us was to stop anti-competitive FFP being challenged legally.
Last edited:
city saint
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 6,329
circle the wagons boys and girls