PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Maly]

I don't think the motive needs to be proven because the rules simply say you've got to disclose all remuneration to the PL. The bit the PL would need to prove would be "was this 1.7m a year from Al Jazira actually remuneration for being Manchester City manager?".

How would you prove that? I suppose you'd want to -

a) Show how ludicrously low Mancini's official salary was compared to Hughes, Pellegrini and other managers in the PL in 2009.

b) Show a clear flow of payments from City to Al Jazira to Mancini.

c) Show Mancini never actually went to Al Jazira to do the work he was being paid for.

d) Show how paying Mancini via a tax haven saved City enough money to be important. For Mancini to take home an extra £1.7m a year would have cost City about another £4m+ p/a if paid in the UK.



However, to do that you'd need a lot of information from Al Jazira like bank records, and Mancini's travel schedule and I don't think the PL can access that.

Was the Al Jazira contract with Mancini himself or his Ltd company?

If it’s the latter, Mancini wouldn’t have had to attend at all, as long as someone attended on behalf of or from of his company

 

[bluenova]

Mancini's City contract was heavily incentivised on top of his basic. So in his first full season (2010/11) we won the FA Cup and finished in the top four. I think that netted him about £5m in total.

Winning the league increased that and he renegotiated his City contract, to the point where he worked be earning something like £11-12m in that 2012-13 season.

Also, he didn't personally have to provide that consultancy to Al Jazira, his company did. So he could legitimately get someone else to do it.

Having seen the amount of money that the Saudi league is throwing about, his contract could well be for a couple of phone calls a year.

The people involved have probably paid more for someone to DJ at a family birthday party.

 

[Silva61]

Oh I totally agree. What’s considered “wrong” or illegal in the real world is totally different to ffp rules. I have no issue with city operating however they wish and have zero time for ffp but that doesn’t mean I side with the argument we haven’t inadvertently or even knowingly broken or tried to circumvent these ffp rules at certain times.

Is this anything more than a hunch? And it's a capital C.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Having seen the amount of money that the Saudi league is throwing about, his contract could well be for a couple of phone calls a year.

The people involved have probably paid more for someone to DJ at a family birthday party.

He didn't have to go out there. It was for a total of 4 days per year, so an hour's video call every fortnight would cover it, along with a day or two out there in the summer.

 

[Shirley]

Having seen the amount of money that the Saudi league is throwing about, his contract could well be for a couple of phone calls a year.

The people involved have probably paid more for someone to DJ at a family birthday party.

He wasn’t involved or employed by the Saudis, his contract was with the UAE club.

 

[wolviedinho]

it just seems impossible to me we come out of all this unscathed. the number of charges against us clearly designed in a way for something to stick for sure. let alone the reputation damage since the charges.

We have already been lynched by the media so not totally unscathed. As for further financial or points deduction? I just can’t see it.

We are currently having a public spat with our sporting rivals with the premier acting as an unfaithful agent. Behind the scenes I would expect a very different picture. They all do deals with each other.

What we need is a Jeremy Kyle show where the dips/rags on one side and city having taken a lie detector test awaiting results -:)

 

[Stoned Rose]

The reports I have read, including claims here, were that an employee went there and used his old password that nobody at the City end bothered to change.

If that's true, it wasn't a 'hack' then. He maybe broke his contract clauses on conduct after leaving, and they exploited access that wasn't specifically granted, but does that really constitute a system breach?

If true at all, of course.

Which, if it is, is probably more likely why the club didn't pursue it much harder, rather than just being naively nice.

He’s gained access to a system he is not authorised to access and taken information from it.

If that happened to one of your password protected online accounts your head would fall off.

Don’t be downplaying it mate.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

All the fuss about the Mancini contract is frying my brain,

Der Spiegel provided a link to everything thay have 2022,. There is a 53 page PDF that you can download. Just google "Mancini Der Spiegel April 22" and scroll down to the link. You can then see the exact content that the IC will be looking at rather than the multiple mixed explanations in this thread. The answers are all there.

But this is a waste of time:

• We are are already fucked on Point 1 of the PL charge sheet if it gets down to this.
• It is not a hanging offence if indeed there is an offence.
• It is immaterial in any case as repeatedly confirmed by Stefan and others.
• We're ok anyway as per my recent posts :)

Here's a taster from a couple of documents:

 

[domalino]

Mancini's City contract was heavily incentivised on top of his basic. So in his first full season (2010/11) we won the FA Cup and finished in the top four. I think that netted him about £5m in total.

Winning the league increased that and he renegotiated his City contract, to the point where he worked be earning something like £11-12m in that 2012-13 season.

Also, he didn't personally have to provide that consultancy to Al Jazira, his company did. So he could legitimately get someone else to do it.

I would presume Hughes, Pellegrini and other managers in the league would have similar incentives, so comparing base salaries or even total possible remuneration would still be a persuasive way of arguing he was being underpaid.

As for someone else doing the consulting, the question just becomes - Yeah but did someone else do it? Can someone show something was done in return for the £1.7m/year to rebut the accusation in the same way City could get Etihad or Etisalat execs to stand up in CAS under threat of perjury and explain that the accusations are false?

 

[bluenova]

He wasn’t involved or employed by the Saudis, his contract was with the UAE club.

I know that :)

But it shows the kind of money that the Royal family in an oil rich state can throw around without thinking.