Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,593
- Team supported
- Manchester City
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles
- Thread starter BlueDejong
- Start date
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
As I remember the old thread the goalposts were moved after we provided our accounts to find us guilty.
We reached agreement with uefa to save their face because they were afraid we would take them to court because they operate a barrier to entry as a form of cartel.
They would have stopped our on field advancement during the prolonged Court case so we accepted a lesser fine.
Hopefully I got that somewhere near right ?
We reached agreement with uefa to save their face because they were afraid we would take them to court because they operate a barrier to entry as a form of cartel.
They would have stopped our on field advancement during the prolonged Court case so we accepted a lesser fine.
Hopefully I got that somewhere near right ?
Centurions
Well-Known Member
No, we were fined £49m, £32m of which was suspended and was subsequently returned.I seem to remember the original fine was higher but they made rule changes after we'd submitted the accounts in accordance to the original rules, which we probably informed them we'll probably revisit after "taking the pinch" in the short term. Pretty soon after it was reduced from £60m to £20m or something like that, probably because their arses went after talking to their lawyers.
I feel my bias is influencing here but am I wrong to interpret this report as portraying City in the positive? What I mean is that it seems like UEFA used FFP to try sanctioning us, BUT we knew FFP is bullshit and can be won against if taken to court, thus our legal threats. HOWEVER, we didn't take them to court as we should've, and instead willfully took on the sanctions (negotiated version) which otherwise are illegal?
I've only read the thing cursorily so might've missed what exactly happened.
I've only read the thing cursorily so might've missed what exactly happened.
TCIB
Well-Known Member
As I remember the old thread the goalposts were moved after we provided our accounts to find us guilty.
We reached agreement with uefa to save their face because they were afraid we would take them to court because they operate a barrier to entry as a form of cartel.
They would have stopped our on field advancement during the prolonged Court case so we accepted a lesser fine.
Hopefully I got that somewhere near right ?
I think so yeah and reading the actual correspondence has opened fresh wounds it seems for those with vested interests.
Jazzman
Well-Known Member
Seems like a rehash of old news. A little embarrassing for Spiegel in my eyes. All this drum banging and this is all they have?
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
Seems like a rehash of old news. A little embarrassing for Spiegel in my eyes. All this drum banging and this is all they have?
Yep. Far more worrying for me is the stuff about a European Super League. Some of that is re-hashed too but there appears to be a lot more detail to it and I think if it replaced our own domestic competition then that would be the death knell for a lot of us.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,952
Most importantly the events described start AFTER UEFA changed the FFP rules AFTER City had submitted there 2011-12 accounts. The rule changes were technical in nature but were done in a manner guaranteed to make City fail FFP. Without them City would have passed FFP. A point City made time without nunber but which fell on deaf ears. Interestingly City waited till the last possible moment to submit subsequent accounts.to UEFA.I read through the whole article and I am here to help you make arguments to those who will inevitably shit talk us. Just follow the below talking points.
1) The sequence of events prove that FFP is illegal. This is exactly the reason UEFA were trying to reach a settlement with us and not go to court. Basically FFP is a small little concept they imagined to swindle money from vulnerable new owners not part of the establishment.
2) We did shady backroom deals with UEFA. But see that non of this is illegal by law unless proven otherwise. It could be two business entities meeting in a room for a settlement.
3) Knowing all these city should stop following FFP and take it to court and destroy FFP and maybe UEFA in the process(one of the most corrupt business in the world along with FIFA)
Feel free to use these points when talking back to the shit talkers. have a nice day
Also which club had PwC as their accountants? Ask why PwC were so intransigent as a result. The answer is obvious if you think about it - Loss of the MUFC account!
As to related party crap. Der Speigel seem to know feck all about international accountancy rules.
Last edited:
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
You are correct G., I also believe City are in a much better position both financially and on the field to retaliate should any accusations continue.I think so yeah and reading the actual correspondence has opened fresh wounds it seems for those with vested interests.
They may regret bringing it to the surface again.
I feel my bias is influencing here but am I wrong to interpret this report as portraying City in the positive? What I mean is that it seems like UEFA used FFP to try sanctioning us, BUT we knew FFP is bullshit and can be won against if taken to court, thus our legal threats. HOWEVER, we didn't take them to court as we should've, and instead willfully took on the sanctions (negotiated version) which otherwise are illegal?
I've only read the thing cursorily so might've missed what exactly happened.
this is exactly what happened. Because FFP is illegal and wouldn't stand in court