PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[bobbyowenquiff]

Mike Keegan and the Daily United shit stirring again.

Link added this time.

10 years old!

According to a 2020 UEFA report obtained by the makers of a YouTube film, the Treble winners took two £15m payments from an Abu Dhabi-based individual in 2012 and 2013, sums that should have come from a club sponsor.

UEFA's financial control body concluded that the payments, meant to have arrived from UAE-owned telecoms firm Etisalat, were actually 'disguised equity funding'. It alleged the money actually came from City's Abu Dhabi-based owners, which was a breach of their rules.

View attachment 84980

Manchester City 'were paid £30m by a mystery figure from the UAE'

MIKE KEEGAN: According to a 2020 UEFA report, City took two £15m payments from an Abu Dhabi-based individual in 2012 and 2013, sums that should have come from a club sponsor.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Such a new revelation that it was in the Guardian in 2020 and was part of the UEFA evidence which was dismissed by CAS. You would think Keegan would have checked on Google and phoned up David Conn.

 

[Taylor]

The club need to start taking these clowns to the cleaners

 

[JASR]

And still there are a handful of flat earthers on here who insist there is no co-ordinated agenda against our club
The football equivalent of those poor Japanese fellas living under bushes on some remote godforsaken island in the pacific and still thinking they were at war 5 years after Hiroshima

Off topic:
It was 29 years

Hiroo Onoda - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Edit: slightly longer

Teruo Nakamura - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[John Wayne]

Mike Keegan and the Daily United shit stirring again.

Link added this time.

10 years old!

According to a 2020 UEFA report obtained by the makers of a YouTube film, the Treble winners took two £15m payments from an Abu Dhabi-based individual in 2012 and 2013, sums that should have come from a club sponsor.

UEFA's financial control body concluded that the payments, meant to have arrived from UAE-owned telecoms firm Etisalat, were actually 'disguised equity funding'. It alleged the money actually came from City's Abu Dhabi-based owners, which was a breach of their rules.

View attachment 84980

Manchester City 'were paid £30m by a mystery figure from the UAE'

MIKE KEEGAN: According to a 2020 UEFA report, City took two £15m payments from an Abu Dhabi-based individual in 2012 and 2013, sums that should have come from a club sponsor.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Again, not doing their homework.

City acknowledge that the payments were made by Mansour on behalf of Etisalat in 2011/12 and 2012/13. Mansour was reimbursed in 2015 by the company. It's documented in the books of Etisalat, MCFC and ADUG. The Etisalat chairman rejected in person any idea that the company received a rogue payment. They are a publicly listed company, audited to rigorous standards. How shit are these journalists? Seriously.

 

[Cobwebcat]

The irony of a film accusing City of using a mysterious hidden investor, made by mysterious hidden producers, is too glorious and hilarious for words
McGeehan’s involvement pretty much rules out Qatar and points to Americans and the WhatsApp group

Shadowy I think he said at one point. There was zero facts In the revelations.

David Dein has gone up in my estimation. He wanted no part of it.

 

[Chappie]

I would assume they can go back 5 years from the point they make the charge not open the investigation.

However PL rules maybe different to others.

Ultimately it’s not going to court but to a PL independent panel (I can tell you now no panel is independent if they are being paid by one of the parties, not suggesting foul play but that they will likely start with the PL statement of case as the facts with City having to disprove (making it an uphill battle)).

I think they are likely to accept it and explore it.

They will stick us with something but UEFA was the one. Very good chance what we alleged did, if we did was to get through UEFA FFP, Prem FFP we would be a lot more likely to pass anyway.

The Premier league have to have evidence for each of the 115 charges they have brought against City.
City do not have to disprove anything.
The burden of proof in this country is on the accuser and not the defendant.

 

[OrigamiNinja]

Isn't this completely covered by the attachment?

If I am reading that correctly then the PL would need a miracle proving against that? City, ADUG, Etisalat and EY all have shown the transaction to be above board. There’s no new smoking gun, it’s a rehash of something that based on that screenshot the club would surely have had little problem talking through had it not been time-barred?

 

[gray740]

A supposed Journalist quoting Youtube film maker ,you couldn`t make it up could you, sweet Jesus .

 

[Rory Bluelow]

And still there are a handful of flat earthers on here who insist there is no co-ordinated agenda against our club
The football equivalent of those poor Japanese fellas living under bushes on some remote godforsaken island in the pacific and still thinking they were at war 5 years after Hiroshima

Honestly, anyone who can’t see what our enemies/rivals are doing is beyond fucking hope. It’s glaringly obvious.

 

[Sleeping_Easy]

It's not true that time barring doesn't exist under Premier League rules?

Under English law it still remains to be five years?

This is only a guidance and not a rule though. If the evidence is compelling enough then a judge can still choose to hear the case. I’d like to think the clubs evidence is strong enough that this won’t have to be used as a defence. If it is our defence then we’re up shits creek without a paddle