I've been thinking about this the last few days. My thinking can be slow and deliberate so it can take me a few days and a lot of thinking to get my head round things properly. We don't know with certainty what the PL have got or what the specifics of the various charges are.
It shows up Neville's comments about United.Interesting to see how Tottenham have grown commercial revenue over the same timeframe, with apparently zero owner investment and no real success on the pitch?
Is it actually showing the strength of the premier league and the amount of money that revolves around all premier league clubs in general?
Comparisons of City with Real Madrid aren't really all that valid given that the PL is pulling in around £7.5bn and La Liga only £1.5bn
City having thoroughly dominated the PL over the last decade as well as having had repeated success in domestic cups and participation to the later stages of the CL every year since 2013, not really a surprise that we are able to significantly raise our commercial revenue streams above other teams is it?
It's almost as if it's linked to winning thingsIt shows up Neville's comments about United.
Their commercial income has gone down since 2016, when Liverpool and City have doubled theirs.
How did you manage to remember your password ?I was shocked when I posted my first post today actually.
By the fact that it was my first post, and by the date of registration ha
I always love reading your posts PB and i also love reading your stuff in kotk.I've been thinking about this the last few days. My thinking can be slow and deliberate so it can take me a few days and a lot of thinking to get my head round things properly. We don't know with certainty what the PL have got or what the specifics of the various charges are.
But there's at least two substantive charges, and we think we know they relate to Mancini's contract with Al Jazira and image rights payments to players. With respect to the former, the PL would have to prove Mancini did not fulfil that contract to provide at least 4 days consultancy per year. Conversely, we need to show he did, and we should be cleared on any of the charges relating to that.
The image rights one is more difficult to call. Those were paid by Fordham from 2013-14 to 2017-18 as far as I can see but the charges also seem to pre-date 2013. Fordham paid us for those rights in the 2012-13 financial year and we assigned the intellectual property of those image rights to them, which they then apparently paid. It's a strange, but not illegal, arrangement that I suspect was used to generate revenue in that financial year when we thought there was a chance we could escape punishment using the Annex XI provisions. I wonder if we'd have done it in different circumstances? This is the one I feel we'll be more vulnerable on than the Mancini charges.
But both of these were part of the material put out by Der Spiegel, based on the hacked emails. The question is, if these are all they've got, then there's nothing new from 2018 but neither of these came up in the UEFA charges arising from Der Spiegel articles. So did UEFA decide they weren't worth pursuing or did they try to focus solely on the sponsorship stuff that they thought was the most egregious breach? Either way, it gives me confidence.
One thing we also know from the previous battle with UEFA is that we didn't cooperate (on legal advice I might add) because we thought they were 'fishing'. I wonder if we took the same stance with the PL, who then had to resort to stuff that was known to UEFA but they didn't pursue, potentially for reasons I outlined above.
I therefore suspect there's little new in these charges and that mainly it's a rehash of the Der Spiegel stuff, and stuff that was either time-barred or that UEFA didn't pursue. And out of that, they've generated dozens of charges making things seem much worse than they really are.
Excellent I imagine however the response will be a bit rubbish even I don’t trust politician but leaving that aside she will fear you publishing her response and interfering in the current process at a PL and potentially a Court level and also won’t want to over emphasis Abu Dhabi links for fear of that being seen as the reason for any victory / dropping of chargesGood afternoon Lucy,
I am writing to you as minister for sport to convey my disappointment at the way my football club is currently being treated by the fa and premier league.
I believe there is a white paper due soon on football governance and how the game can be run more fairly and responsibly. At present I believe there is one club of the so called top six clubs in England in favour of such a new authority, and unless I am mistaken that club is mine , namely Manchester City.
I fervently believe that, based on the evidence and decision documented by CAS some months ago when we were accused of much the same offences and found innocent, we should not have to have our name dragged through the mud once more at the behest of the clubs who are driving the premier league to take this action.
My hope is that the government should and could intercede in this matter by allowing a truly independent review not only of our current case, but also truly independent and responsible governance of the game as a whole.
I like most Manchester City fans ask for no special treatment, I am actually in favour of true FFP, that protects clubs from irresponsible owners and unmanageable debt of the kind that recently drove another of my local clubs Bury FC To cease trading.
Football, like any other business should be allowed to receive investment from Uk or foreign individuals in a responsible way.
It was always my hope that Manchester City wouldn’t be the last club driven to success, but just one in a long line of clubs such as Blackburn and Chelsea that allow football fans to dream that one day they might be so lucky.
Professional football at any level should not be manipulated by shareholder clubs to promote anti competition and favouritism against another.
Also as a nation we do rely on a large element of foreign investment, I do not think we are in a position to put at risk tens of billions of investment by Abu Dhabi to please the owners of other football teams who invest almost nothing into the clubs they own or the area and community surrounding them.
I think I wouldn’t have to remind you of the wonderful things done in east Manchester over the last decade to transform a toxic and run down area of great social deprivation. And that is poignant point as it was why Manchester City was founded some hundred of so years ago.
I would be very interested to know your views on this matter and how your department views the recent events last week on the above.
With best regards
I've been thinking about this the last few days. My thinking can be slow and deliberate so it can take me a few days and a lot of thinking to get my head round things properly. We don't know with certainty what the PL have got or what the specifics of the various charges are.
But there's at least two substantive charges, and we think we know they relate to Mancini's contract with Al Jazira and image rights payments to players. With respect to the former, the PL would have to prove Mancini did not fulfil that contract to provide at least 4 days consultancy per year. Conversely, we need to show he did, and we should be cleared on any of the charges relating to that.
The image rights one is more difficult to call. Those were paid by Fordham from 2013-14 to 2017-18 as far as I can see but the charges also seem to pre-date 2013. Fordham paid us for those rights in the 2012-13 financial year and we assigned the intellectual property of those image rights to them, which they then apparently paid. It's a strange, but not illegal, arrangement that I suspect was used to generate revenue in that financial year when we thought there was a chance we could escape punishment using the Annex XI provisions. I wonder if we'd have done it in different circumstances? This is the one I feel we'll be more vulnerable on than the Mancini charges.
But both of these were part of the material put out by Der Spiegel, based on the hacked emails. The question is, if these are all they've got, then there's nothing new from 2018 but neither of these came up in the UEFA charges arising from Der Spiegel articles. So did UEFA decide they weren't worth pursuing or did they try to focus solely on the sponsorship stuff that they thought was the most egregious breach? Either way, it gives me confidence.
One thing we also know from the previous battle with UEFA is that we didn't cooperate (on legal advice I might add) because we thought they were 'fishing'. I wonder if we took the same stance with the PL, who then had to resort to stuff that was known to UEFA but they didn't pursue, potentially for reasons I outlined above.
I therefore suspect there's little new in these charges and that mainly it's a rehash of the Der Spiegel stuff, and stuff that was either time-barred or that UEFA didn't pursue. And out of that, they've generated dozens of charges making things seem much worse than they really are.
Also remember it could take years... what's the point worrying about something that may or may not happen in a few yearsWhen we all get anxious about this think what the club have told us. They are confident of clearing our name once and for all.
Very good, and thanks for writing on our behalf. Please let us know the details of her reply.Good afternoon Lucy,
I am writing to you as minister for sport to convey my disappointment at the way my football club is currently being treated by the fa and premier league.
I believe there is a white paper due soon on football governance and how the game can be run more fairly and responsibly. At present I believe there is one club of the so called top six clubs in England in favour of such a new authority, and unless I am mistaken that club is mine , namely Manchester City.
I fervently believe that, based on the evidence and decision documented by CAS some months ago when we were accused of much the same offences and found innocent, we should not have to have our name dragged through the mud once more at the behest of the clubs who are driving the premier league to take this action.
My hope is that the government should and could intercede in this matter by allowing a truly independent review not only of our current case, but also truly independent and responsible governance of the game as a whole.
I like most Manchester City fans ask for no special treatment, I am actually in favour of true FFP, that protects clubs from irresponsible owners and unmanageable debt of the kind that recently drove another of my local clubs Bury FC To cease trading.
Football, like any other business should be allowed to receive investment from Uk or foreign individuals in a responsible way.
It was always my hope that Manchester City wouldn’t be the last club driven to success, but just one in a long line of clubs such as Blackburn and Chelsea that allow football fans to dream that one day they might be so lucky.
Professional football at any level should not be manipulated by shareholder clubs to promote anti competition and favouritism against another.
Also as a nation we do rely on a large element of foreign investment, I do not think we are in a position to put at risk tens of billions of investment by Abu Dhabi to please the owners of other football teams who invest almost nothing into the clubs they own or the area and community surrounding them.
I think I wouldn’t have to remind you of the wonderful things done in east Manchester over the last decade to transform a toxic and run down area of great social deprivation. And that is poignant point as it was why Manchester City was founded some hundred of so years ago.
I would be very interested to know your views on this matter and how your department views the recent events last week on the above.
With best regards