Newcastle United Thread - 2021/22

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Just read that.

Surely City's legal team will be on to that?

I'm hoping this will push the Saudis into testing the legal basis for preventing a business owner investing as much as they like in their own business. Something city seemed to have not done previously to keep the peace for long term gain. I think the PL is risking overplaying a weak hand here though.

 

[jrb]

I'm hoping this will push the Saudis into testing the legal basis for preventing a business owner investing as much as they like in their own business. Something city seemed to have not done previously to keep the peace for long term gain. I think the PL is risking overplaying a weak hand here though.

The only problem being, have the Saudis got enough money to mount a serious legal challenge?

 

[goalmole]

And we know where those 3 points will come from!

Noooooooooooooooo

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

The only problem being, have the Saudis got enough money to mount a serious legal challenge?

Probably has it in cash rattling around in the glove compartment in his car

 

[M18CTID]

Related party transactions aren’t illegal in the world of business. They’re not even illegal in the world of FFP, yet all these clubs think they can just vote to override the current FFP regs. That’s bent as fuck if you ask me. Funny how none of them complained about related party transactions up at Newcastle when Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct sponsored them for years under his ownership. Ditto Stoke and Bet365.

Surely Newcastle have a case to take strong legal action against all those clubs who voted in favour of this.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Crucial they do what we do, and get some steel and experience in first. We were actually in a relegation scrap until we got the likes of Bellamy, Given and De Jong in. Supplement the quality in after you have strenghted the core

I think all three have retired.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Bruce has always come across as ok to me.

You're going for a big catch

 

[give it to gordon]

It really is scandalous clubs attempting to block investment into another club. And for any lurking Geordies reading this, City have had to fight this kind of shit for over a decade, and if you were one of those mouthy twats who had a pop at City then tough shit, welcome to the real world.

It is scandalous. It cant be legal.

But it's ok to be sponsored by dodge banks who are fined 1.2 billion for money laundering.

I told a Newcastle fan ( another forum ) over a year ago that this sort of thing would happen. He just laughed and sided with the other club fans saying City had broken this that and the other lol. Wonder what he thinks now lolol. Didnt believe the American own clubs would cause problems for them etc !

 

[Metalartin]

https://theathletic.com/news/newcas...blocked-by-premier-league-clubs/2ftjnu6VjcFg/

The Athletic describing City as an Abu Dhabi owned club. It's beyond a joke how many people get this wrong these days and that City do nothing to correct mistakes like this and others.

The Abu Dhabi owned club have been accused of benefitting from related party transactions in the past.

Back on topic though:

I thought everyone knew related party sponsorships and commercial deals were never banned, they have been regulated from the introduction of FFP though. Any related party deals, still have to meet Fair Market Value requirements with UEFA's credited auditors. If the PL doesn't have a similar rule in place, then that's what they should be looking at instead. To ban them all together, would be a step too far and I can see what City are saying... So why can't any of our supposedly well educated journalists, see what City are saying in that statement?

City aren't saying this just because of a self interest in their own deals. UEFA's own auditors couldn't show the Etihad deal to be inflated, all the way back to 2014. The idea that they didn't look into it before then, is unlikely to me. They would have been looking into it from day 1 of that Etihad deal signed in 2011. Meaning, that it's very likely that the Etihad deal in particular, was never considered to be inflated by their own auditors, at any point. The CAS, as others have said, did not deem Etihad to be a related party either. So that argument fails on two counts.

 

[give it to gordon]

Has this really happened as I cant see anything on the bbc website sports pages