PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[toffee balls]

I have had the same. Its only the rags and dippers that have a problem with us

If only this were true.

The witch-hunt unfortunately has bit a lot deeper than that.

 

[Barcon]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=i+heart+pb&crid=102SCIF5NEUHS&sprefix=i+heart+pb+%2Caps%2C82&ref=nb_sb_noss

Can i add my middle initial as well?

 

[bluemonkey71]

I doubt it, as both CAS and even UEFA accepted that Etisalat had met their obligations.

Thanks for a great blog post. How can the PL hit us for charge 3 UEFA FFP? That’s surely not under their jurisdiction?

 

[117 M34]

I've done the first of a series of pieces on my blog about the first group of charges, which are seemingly all connected to the Etihad & Etisalat sponsorships.

Manchester City’s PL charges explained – Part 1

Accounts, sponsorships and related parties

open.substack.com

In relation to:
3) Rules that require clubs to comply with UEFA’s FFP regulations, covering 2013/14 to 2017/18,

Why were united not charged by the premier league when they failed uefa ffp?
If its a PL rule that you must pass uefa ffp then surely they have failed and should be charged.

 

[Chi-town blues]

If you know PB it can be discounted. However you'd need to disclose this relationship at the checkout and especially if you get the discount on the back of your 'relationship'.

That 'relationship' could come back to haunt you in years to come if PB is late in submitting his accounts as your discount would then make you a related party in his complex finances.....


Or something like that.

Can I secretly pay mancini instead?

 

[Bez]

In relation to:
3) Rules that require clubs to comply with UEFA’s FFP regulations, covering 2013/14 to 2017/18,

Why were united not charged by the premier league when they failed uefa ffp?
If its a PL rule that you must pass uefa ffp then surely they have failed and should be charged.

Spot on. All I can find online is the Premier League declined to comment when they were asked the same question. Without clarity from the PL, the breach by Man Utd not being charged looks like a sham to me. Who does the PL chairperson support? Man Utd.

 

[Ric]

Slightly less inflammatory/more conciliatory language from Ceferin here in his latest interview?

You’ve been clear recently about your view of Manchester City’s guilt in breaching FFP rules, which they deny. Was there any route for you to attempt fresh proceedings against them in 2021 after the court of arbitration for sport (Cas) overturned the two‑year Champions League ban you had imposed?

No, I don’t think so. Our club financial control body decided. City succeeded with Cas, then, for me, the story was over.

‘It was like I became Kim Jong-un’: Aleksander Ceferin on Uefa, Super Leagues and Saudi cash

Exclusive: the combative Uefa president talks about his controversial plans that prompted Boban’s exit, Super League threats and football in a time of war

www.theguardian.com

 

[Danny Hoekman]

Speaking to Spurs fans yesterday was a good reality check that we should all take comfort from. We are fed red media bullshit and forced to listen to ignorant rags and the odd scouser (we quote their shite too often in here).
Each Spurs fan said how bitter rags and scousers are. “Pure jealousy” and that our club is an example of how a club should be run. We don’t overpay etc.
This backs up my experiences of other club’s fans and what others have said on here. Most football fans know and see the tiresome rags for what they are. Also said that they couldn’t sit and have a rational conversation with them. Delusional and arrogant.
They just have too much of a mouth in our lives and in the media. They really better off ignored. You should sleep happy in our glorious halcyon days.
Btw respect to Spurs fans they are generally not a reflection of their chairman.

The only Spurs fan who spoke to me just mouthed "Ya fackin' norfern mankey caaant".

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

In relation to:
3) Rules that require clubs to comply with UEFA’s FFP regulations, covering 2013/14 to 2017/18,

Why were united not charged by the premier league when they failed uefa ffp?
If its a PL rule that you must pass uefa ffp then surely they have failed and should be charged.

There are different maximum allowable losses, with the PL's PSR limit much higher than the UEFA FFP limit. UEFA's was a maximum of €45m (£38m) over 3 years whereas the PL allows a maximum of £105m over the same period.

 

[argyle]

I don't think the Guardian journalist expected this reply from Ceferin.

This brings us to state-run clubs. Some would say we have sleepwalked into this issue: that European football wasn’t ready for their influence and stranglehold. Does it worry you that this has escalated during your tenure?

I’m not worried about state-owned clubs as long as they respect the rules. I’m more worried about hedge fund-owned clubs. With hedge funds, you never know exactly who is behind them. It’s very hard to know because they are, many times, managing money for investors. Where I see a big difference, and maybe this is a bit simplistic, is that state-owned clubs want to win. Whether it’s also for name-washing or not, I don’t enter into this. But they want to win. With purely financial funds it’s important to get money and winning is not the main goal. For state-owned clubs, the goal is not to take money out, so I think those clubs should be more sustainable. With the others, it’s very hard to know who is behind it. It can also be a hedge fund where a state is behind it. But I prefer that it’s clear ownership. And the rules are clear: if they don’t respect them, they get punished.