IF and still a big IF we get found guilty on the Mancini payments and/or image rights surely it's still a big stretch to claim we gained any sporting advantage over it? What was the Mancini payment, £1.5m about 12 years ago?The tactic of widen the scope out further looking at Mancini’s contract and image rights for players and over a longer period of time demonstrates that this is an attempt to throw as much shit at the wall in the hope that something sticks. Uefa never went after the two later points, the fact the Premier League is shows that they don’t have anything more than what Uefa had.
Exactly. Even if we were guilty of the Mancini stuff, I don't see how we've gained an advantage given we were making eye-watering losses at the time and the "arrangement" pre-dated FFP.IF and still a big IF we get found guilty on the Mancini payments and/or image rights surely it's still a big stretch to claim we gained any sporting advantage over it? What was the Mancini payment, £1.5m about 12 years ago?
Or will they try to claim that because of that our accounts haven't then subsequently been correct and fair for every year since?...
The Super League may be the only game left in town if/when the Premier League complete their campaign against us. I hope City are preparing the ground, Chelsea, Newcastle and City are all in the same boat as being the ones they want to stop. The three red shirt clubs who between them have won one premier league title in a decade are old news so why not plan to split and let them wither on the vine? City should look to capture FIFA and make any embryonic Super League FIFA approved, they could also set the wheels in motion for a FIFA World Club Series that includes the Arab and South American clubs, maybe as a replacement for the Champions League?Ceferin’s work is cut out keeping the likes of Madrid, Juventus and Barcelona from going forming a Super League. Trying to peg City back over the last decade has been a massive waste of energy and resources when their focus should have been elsewhere.
Great post. There's Etisalat as well, but CAS dealt with that even though it was time-barred. And even UEFA were ok with that once Etisalat had reimbursed ADUG. So as you say, there's absolutely no mileage there.That CAS report is quite interesting if you have the time to read it. Basically accused us of pumping money into City under the guise of the Etihad deal. Some hacked mails were stitched together. Accountants couldn't match money going through ADUG into City to match these alleged payments and no payments were made back to Etihad. Sworn statements from the Etihad CEO and others. I don't see any reason why the PL would go for that one. Yes we were obstructive and Pearce didnt rock up till CAS which is a bit weird. Having said that though I think if financial experts/bank statements/auditors/sworn statements from people convinced the panel that there was nothing shady going on then I'd expect anything Etihad related will get thrown out of the window by the IC.
I learnt from the master ;)Great post. There's Etisalat as well, but CAS dealt with that even though it was time-barred. And even UEFA were ok with that once Etisalat had reimbursed ADUG. So as you say, there's absolutely no mileage there.
Of course there are two airlines in the UAE, one is called ETIHAD the other one is called EMIRATES. Now ETIHAD sponsor at team called CITY, and this deal is perceived to be highly suspect, a bit dodgy, possibly just sportswashing. EMIRATES sponsor a team called ARSENAL, now this deal is perfect in every possible way, and absolutely nothing to do with sportswashing.That CAS report is quite interesting if you have the time to read it. Basically accused us of pumping money into City under the guise of the Etihad deal. Some hacked mails were stitched together. Accountants couldn't match money going through ADUG into City to match these alleged payments and no payments were made back to Etihad. Sworn statements from the Etihad CEO and others. I don't see any reason why the PL would go for that one. Yes we were obstructive and Pearce didnt rock up till CAS which is a bit weird. Having said that though I think if financial experts/bank statements/auditors/sworn statements from people convinced the panel that there was nothing shady going on then I'd expect anything Etihad related will get thrown out of the window by the IC.
Great post. There's Etisalat as well, but CAS dealt with that even though it was time-barred. And even UEFA were ok with that once Etisalat had reimbursed ADUG. So as you say, there's absolutely no mileage there.
IF and still a big IF we get found guilty on the Mancini payments and/or image rights surely it's still a big stretch to claim we gained any sporting advantage over it? What was the Mancini payment, £1.5m about 12 years ago?
Or will they try to claim that because of that our accounts haven't then subsequently been correct and fair for every year since?...
Surely he'd be the first person they'd want to speak to.We were making 150 million quid losses at the time paying Mancini £2 million under the table would have hardly made a dent in trying to meet FFP criteria.
It’s weird that nobody has spoken to Mancini over this from the Premier League if that is their angle of attack.