PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

tolmie's hairdoo said:
If they can't establish fraud, then they can't win in the long term

If they find us guilty under the balance of probabilities, with the overriding inference of fraud, than City are able to take this to a proper Court.

Prem are caught between pulling the guillotine but also putting their own head in with ours.
Click to expand...
They have to infer fraud surely to get us for the most serious charges ?

Are you saying even if everything is done correctly just by inferring fraud we can argue that it’s affectively the wrong location for such and ruling and take it to court ?

How is this any different to private prosecutions ?
 
Dribble said:
Pay no attention mate. We've a problem on this forum with ManUre fans joining & posing as City fans, so there's a unhinged level of paranoia with some around here. I take people as I find until they give me a reason to believe otherwise.

It's not cut & dried pal. In 2018/19, we faced the same charges with UEFA as we do now, were found guilty, fined £30m & given a 2 year Champions League ban, which was suspended, pending our appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

On appeal, CAS found us not guilty on all charges, aside from non-cooperation for which we were fined £10m.

Because of our 2014 experience with UEFA/G14, City decided it was pointless showing our hand to them during their investigation stage again, as they would use our evidence to amend their accusations & rules to nail us, exactly as they did in 2014. Yup! That's exactly what they did, hence the zero trust between City & UEFA/G14.

UEFA made their accusations against us based on 6 emails, from over 5 million stolen from us by the notorious Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto.

Of the six emails revealed by the German rag Der Spiegel, two were spliced together from various emails sent a couple of years apart, which gave an out of context view of a sponsorship deal we had with Etisalat.

Once the original emails were viewed with an explanation from City, CAS quickly realised UEFA/G14 had zero actual evidence to backup their claims that our owner injected equity funding into City, disguised as sponsorship.

Essentially what happened was the telecommunications giant Etisalat had a sponsorship agreement with City worth £15m per season over its duration. In 2012/13, we needed to show that money in our account to comply with FFP, so asked Etisalat if they could pay it ahead of schedule.

They couldn’t, but agreed if it could be paid by a bridging loan, they'd be fine with that as they could settle that loan when the original payment schedule ended.

One of the internal City emails between two executives discussed this & it was stated if HRH could source the bridging loan on Etisalat's behalf. Enter UAE financier Jaber Mohammed, who struck a bridging loan deal with Etisalat.

Mohammed paid £15m in 2012 & £15m in 2013 to City which helped us meet FFP. In 2015 when Etisalat's deal ended, they paid Jaber Mohammed back & satisfied the terms of the bridging loan agreement.

Hopefully you're still following me up to this point? :-)

HOWEVER, when this stolen email came to the attention of UEFA/G14, they accused City of getting our owner Sheikh Mansour to pay Jaber Mohammed, who paid City which they claim essentially meant Sheikh Mansour injected money into Manchester City, but disguised it as sponsorship funds from Etisalat.

When asked for evidence of this by CAS, UEFA/G14 didn't have any. They merely connected the dots & made the accusation on their balance of probabilities, based on zero physical evidence, hence why CAS threw their claim out & totally exonerated City.

There was also a claim that City paid part of Roberto Mancini's wages off the books again to circumnavigate FFP. Mancini had an consultancy agreement with ADUG (the company who own City Football Group) to act as a consultant to the Abu Dhabi Football Club - Al Jazira Club worth £1.7m per season.

This was all above board, but UEFA/G14 opined this was done to keep the £1.7m off the books to help City meet FFP requirements. Mancini was on £2m per season basic at City, plus generous bonuses, which pushed his wages closer to £5m per season, but UEFA/G14 still stuck by their claim & added this to City's list of breaches, but again offered zero actual evidence.

Essentially, UEFA/G14 were accusing the Abu Dhabi Royal Family, Roberto Mancini, Etisalat, Etihad Airways & several other high profile multinational companies & huge conglomerates of organised fraud on an industrial scale, BUT without using the word fraud, which would turn their FFP rule "breaches" into a criminal matter, therefore taking it out of their hands & into the hands of the law.

They've inferred all sorts, but never once dared use the word fraud, realising the ramifications if they did. They offered zero actual evidence either, which perfectly highlights the difference between their FFP "Rules" & UK Law.

Their FFP rules are essentially no different to the rules of a private members club. It's like them wanting to sanction a private club member for not washing up their teacup after use. That maybe their club rule, but not washing up your teacup isn't against UK Law.

This is why City are in favour of IREF, the Independent Regulator for English Football, & the Premiere League are dead set against it. Once FFP is looked at through the eyes of UK Law, it doesn't stand a chance. In what other sphere of business isn't a wealthy owner not allowed to invest what he likes into his business?

There's a lot more to our situation, but I've tried to give you the most concise answer I can without explaining chapter & verse, going back to the beginning of our charges in 2009.

We just want to play football, but our fans have been forced to become lay-accountants merely to understand our situation. Hopefully this helps. )(
Click to expand...
avoidconfusion said:
My main concern is that there is no CAS this time. As I understand it we have no means to appeal?
Click to expand...
Well put Dribble for that, you deserve your round of applause. What I find difficult to understand is how an organisation as big as UEFA could find us guilty, in the first place, on such flimsy evidence and on appeal to an authority such as CAS have it all thrown out with the statement " no evidence" ringing in UEFAs ears. Was the first hearing at UEFA corrupt, it certainly seems that way.
As to the other quote I have added by @avoidconfusion, maybe just maybe this is why the Premier League are bringing these breaches/charges against City because there is no appeal against a judgement. In that case are City relying entirely on the panel of the independant commission to reach their verdict without lobbying by the PL, when we all know what is thought of the PL as puppets of the red tops and spuds.
 
Manchester City's football success

The nub of the innuendo and direct attacks is Manchester City's football success. If City had not been so successful, the jealous and envious would not be bothered.

The scurrilous campaign against City, and those behind it, is well known.

There is nothing new or of substance. The media is peddling a monotonous re-hash to appease the redtops and their initially underhand, but now blatant, scheming. Organised and clear. Clear and organised.

The allegations will be considered when both parties to the dispute are ready despite outside agitators doing all they can to bring undue influence to bear.

City`s success is eating them inside out. THE Treble was won in fine fashion. We were behind Arsenal for most of the season, moved into fifth gear, went head-to-head and won, and overtook them to win the PL for the third successive season.

City beat Chelsea, Arsenal and Man U on their way to on field success in the FA Cup, scoring the fastest ever goal in the final after 12 seconds.

City were unbeaten in the Champions League - 13 games undefeated against top opposition including Seville (Europa League winners), Dortmund (2nd in the BL), Bayern, (top of the BL), Real Madrid (defending CL champions), and Inter Milan.

2023 was the greatest successful year in English football history - Manchester City - the best team in the land and all the world.
 
Last edited:
Rory Bluelow said:
It’s diabolical. The Rags appointing Berrada shows the whole conspiracy bollocks behind the charges for what it is. It’s unbelievable that professional sports journalists are spinning such moronic bullshit. There’s no escaping the fact this is a big nail in the coffin of the “charges”. Just a matter of time.
Click to expand...
The charging of Everton and Forest means our case now has to go through to it's full conclusion. Imagine the uproar if it's not
 
Dribble said:
Pay no attention mate. We've a problem on this forum with ManUre fans joining & posing as City fans, so there's a unhinged level of paranoia with some around here. I take people as I find until they give me a reason to believe otherwise.

It's not cut & dried pal. In 2018/19, we faced the same charges with UEFA as we do now, were found guilty, fined £30m & given a 2 year Champions League ban, which was suspended, pending our appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

On appeal, CAS found us not guilty on all charges, aside from non-cooperation for which we were fined £10m.

Because of our 2014 experience with UEFA/G14, City decided it was pointless showing our hand to them during their investigation stage again, as they would use our evidence to amend their accusations & rules to nail us, exactly as they did in 2014. Yup! That's exactly what they did, hence the zero trust between City & UEFA/G14.

UEFA made their accusations against us based on 6 emails, from over 5 million stolen from us by the notorious Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto.

Of the six emails revealed by the German rag Der Spiegel, two were spliced together from various emails sent a couple of years apart, which gave an out of context view of a sponsorship deal we had with Etisalat.

Once the original emails were viewed with an explanation from City, CAS quickly realised UEFA/G14 had zero actual evidence to backup their claims that our owner injected equity funding into City, disguised as sponsorship.

Essentially what happened was the telecommunications giant Etisalat had a sponsorship agreement with City worth £15m per season over its duration. In 2012/13, we needed to show that money in our account to comply with FFP, so asked Etisalat if they could pay it ahead of schedule.

They couldn’t, but agreed if it could be paid by a bridging loan, they'd be fine with that as they could settle that loan when the original payment schedule ended.

One of the internal City emails between two executives discussed this & it was stated if HRH could source the bridging loan on Etisalat's behalf. Enter UAE financier Jaber Mohammed, who struck a bridging loan deal with Etisalat.

Mohammed paid £15m in 2012 & £15m in 2013 to City which helped us meet FFP. In 2015 when Etisalat's deal ended, they paid Jaber Mohammed back & satisfied the terms of the bridging loan agreement.

Hopefully you're still following me up to this point? :-)

HOWEVER, when this stolen email came to the attention of UEFA/G14, they accused City of getting our owner Sheikh Mansour to pay Jaber Mohammed, who paid City which they claim essentially meant Sheikh Mansour injected money into Manchester City, but disguised it as sponsorship funds from Etisalat.

When asked for evidence of this by CAS, UEFA/G14 didn't have any. They merely connected the dots & made the accusation on their balance of probabilities, based on zero physical evidence, hence why CAS threw their claim out & totally exonerated City.

There was also a claim that City paid part of Roberto Mancini's wages off the books again to circumnavigate FFP. Mancini had an consultancy agreement with ADUG (the company who own City Football Group) to act as a consultant to the Abu Dhabi Football Club - Al Jazira Club worth £1.7m per season.

This was all above board, but UEFA/G14 opined this was done to keep the £1.7m off the books to help City meet FFP requirements. Mancini was on £2m per season basic at City, plus generous bonuses, which pushed his wages closer to £5m per season, but UEFA/G14 still stuck by their claim & added this to City's list of breaches, but again offered zero actual evidence.

Essentially, UEFA/G14 were accusing the Abu Dhabi Royal Family, Roberto Mancini, Etisalat, Etihad Airways & several other high profile multinational companies & huge conglomerates of organised fraud on an industrial scale, BUT without using the word fraud, which would turn their FFP rule "breaches" into a criminal matter, therefore taking it out of their hands & into the hands of the law.

They've inferred all sorts, but never once dared use the word fraud, realising the ramifications if they did. They offered zero actual evidence either, which perfectly highlights the difference between their FFP "Rules" & UK Law.

Their FFP rules are essentially no different to the rules of a private members club. It's like them wanting to sanction a private club member for not washing up their teacup after use. That maybe their club rule, but not washing up your teacup isn't against UK Law.

This is why City are in favour of IREF, the Independent Regulator for English Football, & the Premiere League are dead set against it. Once FFP is looked at through the eyes of UK Law, it doesn't stand a chance. In what other sphere of business isn't a wealthy owner not allowed to invest what he likes into his business?

There's a lot more to our situation, but I've tried to give you the most concise answer I can without explaining chapter & verse, going back to the beginning of our charges in 2009.

We just want to play football, but our fans have been forced to become lay-accountants merely to understand our situation. Hopefully this helps. )(
Click to expand...
Fantastic summary @Dribble.
 
Dribble said:
Pay no attention mate. We've a problem on this forum with ManUre fans joining & posing as City fans, so there's a unhinged level of paranoia with some around here. I take people as I find until they give me a reason to believe otherwise.

It's not cut & dried pal. In 2018/19, we faced the same charges with UEFA as we do now, were found guilty, fined £30m & given a 2 year Champions League ban, which was suspended, pending our appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

On appeal, CAS found us not guilty on all charges, aside from non-cooperation for which we were fined £10m.

Because of our 2014 experience with UEFA/G14, City decided it was pointless showing our hand to them during their investigation stage again, as they would use our evidence to amend their accusations & rules to nail us, exactly as they did in 2014. Yup! That's exactly what they did, hence the zero trust between City & UEFA/G14.

UEFA made their accusations against us based on 6 emails, from over 5 million stolen from us by the notorious Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto.

Of the six emails revealed by the German rag Der Spiegel, two were spliced together from various emails sent a couple of years apart, which gave an out of context view of a sponsorship deal we had with Etisalat.

Once the original emails were viewed with an explanation from City, CAS quickly realised UEFA/G14 had zero actual evidence to backup their claims that our owner injected equity funding into City, disguised as sponsorship.

Essentially what happened was the telecommunications giant Etisalat had a sponsorship agreement with City worth £15m per season over its duration. In 2012/13, we needed to show that money in our account to comply with FFP, so asked Etisalat if they could pay it ahead of schedule.

They couldn’t, but agreed if it could be paid by a bridging loan, they'd be fine with that as they could settle that loan when the original payment schedule ended.

One of the internal City emails between two executives discussed this & it was stated if HRH could source the bridging loan on Etisalat's behalf. Enter UAE financier Jaber Mohammed, who struck a bridging loan deal with Etisalat.

Mohammed paid £15m in 2012 & £15m in 2013 to City which helped us meet FFP. In 2015 when Etisalat's deal ended, they paid Jaber Mohammed back & satisfied the terms of the bridging loan agreement.

Hopefully you're still following me up to this point? :-)

HOWEVER, when this stolen email came to the attention of UEFA/G14, they accused City of getting our owner Sheikh Mansour to pay Jaber Mohammed, who paid City which they claim essentially meant Sheikh Mansour injected money into Manchester City, but disguised it as sponsorship funds from Etisalat.

When asked for evidence of this by CAS, UEFA/G14 didn't have any. They merely connected the dots & made the accusation on their balance of probabilities, based on zero physical evidence, hence why CAS threw their claim out & totally exonerated City.

There was also a claim that City paid part of Roberto Mancini's wages off the books again to circumnavigate FFP. Mancini had an consultancy agreement with ADUG (the company who own City Football Group) to act as a consultant to the Abu Dhabi Football Club - Al Jazira Club worth £1.7m per season.

This was all above board, but UEFA/G14 opined this was done to keep the £1.7m off the books to help City meet FFP requirements. Mancini was on £2m per season basic at City, plus generous bonuses, which pushed his wages closer to £5m per season, but UEFA/G14 still stuck by their claim & added this to City's list of breaches, but again offered zero actual evidence.

Essentially, UEFA/G14 were accusing the Abu Dhabi Royal Family, Roberto Mancini, Etisalat, Etihad Airways & several other high profile multinational companies & huge conglomerates of organised fraud on an industrial scale, BUT without using the word fraud, which would turn their FFP rule "breaches" into a criminal matter, therefore taking it out of their hands & into the hands of the law.

They've inferred all sorts, but never once dared use the word fraud, realising the ramifications if they did. They offered zero actual evidence either, which perfectly highlights the difference between their FFP "Rules" & UK Law.

Their FFP rules are essentially no different to the rules of a private members club. It's like them wanting to sanction a private club member for not washing up their teacup after use. That maybe their club rule, but not washing up your teacup isn't against UK Law.

This is why City are in favour of IREF, the Independent Regulator for English Football, & the Premiere League are dead set against it. Once FFP is looked at through the eyes of UK Law, it doesn't stand a chance. In what other sphere of business isn't a wealthy owner not allowed to invest what he likes into his business?

There's a lot more to our situation, but I've tried to give you the most concise answer I can without explaining chapter & verse, going back to the beginning of our charges in 2009.

We just want to play football, but our fans have been forced to become lay-accountants merely to understand our situation. Hopefully this helps. )(
Click to expand...
That's a really clear summary of the main points.
Wonder what city s irrefutable evidence is in summary. Take a guess evidence of Etisalat paying the sponsorship money back, agreement made between them to pay it back that type of thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.