This latest flare up is a little ridiculous. Maguire has seen a document (he wouldn't lie), he said it was very detailed, made no comment as to what it related to (could be anything) and he does receive documents from multiple sources (people rarely send me anything unfortunately). Perhaps he shouldn't tease and should be super careful with his language but he doesn't owe City fans anything.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
This could just be a Tebas commissioned report based on speculation, rather than any smoking gun evidence.This latest flare up is a little ridiculous. Maguire has seen a document (he wouldn't lie), he said it was very detailed, made no comment as to what it related to (could be anything) and he does receive documents from multiple sources (people rarely send me anything unfortunately). Perhaps he shouldn't tease and should be super careful with his language but he doesn't owe City fans anything.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
he didn't exactly say that
Here is the transcript
“Well, this is the accusation which has come from Tebas that Manchester City have artificially inflated their revenues by disguising money from the owners. I have seen some very, very detailed documents which are not in the public domain relating to this, and that's quite intriguing content. I can't go into any details about it.
It's not appropriate to do so, and also it would take up a few hours. But certainly there is a body of opinion still within European football about Manchester City. Tebas feels that they successfully defended their position on appeal at CAS, on a technicality.”
From The Price of Football: Championship clubs vote to tweak PSR rules, Women’s Super League considers scrapping relegation, Mar 6, 2025
This material may be protected by copyright.
Fuck it, here are some thoughts;
Firstly, Maguire is a fucking attention whore.
Secondly, he is even less of a lawyer than I am. He wouldn't know if an intriguing document was convincing, compelling or appealing to reason if it hit him in the face.
Thirdly, Tebas and the rest of European football can think what they want. The club didn't get off at CAS on a technicality. UEFA couldn't prove its allegations to the standard required. And for the last fucking time, time limitation isn't a technicality.
Fourthly, apparently it's Spring already so the decision must be close because some people estimated Springtime as a likely date three months ago (wtaf?).
Fifthly, it is apparently significant that he is in a few Whatsapp groups (?). Tosser. Thanks for sharing.
Sixthly, Tebas is apparently now (at this very moment) filing an EU complaint. No he isn't. It was nearly two years ago.
Seventhly, apparently Tebas is claiming City have been inflating sponsorship income? Every other outlet has said his complaint is that City have been offloading expenses onto companies not in the group. Tbf, I suppose Tebas could be claiming both but Maguire gets no credit from me.
Eighthly to about one hundredthly, every thing else he said.
Dear oh dear.
Last edited:
conversely we dont owe a shameless self publicist anything either.This latest flare up is a little ridiculous. Maguire has seen a document (he wouldn't lie), he said it was very detailed, made no comment as to what it related to (could be anything) and he does receive documents from multiple sources (people rarely send me anything unfortunately). Perhaps he shouldn't tease and should be super careful with his language but he doesn't owe City fans anything.
Well done for utilising the rarely used and much maligned term 'hundredthly'Fuck it, here are some thoughts;
Firstly, Maguire is a fucking attention whore.
Secondly, he is even less of a lawyer than I am. He wouldn't know if an intriguing document was convincing, compelling or appealing to reason if it hit him in the face.
Thirdly, Tebas and the rest of European football can think what they want. The club didn't get off at CAS on a technicality. UEFA couldn't prove its allegations to the standard required. And for the last fucking time, time limitation isn't a technicality.
Fourthly, apparently it's Spring already so the decision must be close because some people estimated Springtime as a likely date three months ago (wtaf?).
Fifthly, it is apparently significant that he is in a few Whatsapp groups (?). Tosser. Thanks for sharing.
Sixthly, Tebas is apparently now (at this very moment) filing an EU complaint. No he isn't. It was nearly two years ago.
Seventhly, apparently Tebas is claiming City have been inflating sponsorship income? Every other outlet has said his complaint is that City have been offloading expenses onto companies not in the group. Tbf, I suppose Tebas could be claiming both but Maguire gets no credit from me.
Eighthly to about one hunredthly, every thing else he said.
Dear oh dear.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
This latest flare up is a little ridiculous. Maguire has seen a document (he wouldn't lie), he said it was very detailed, made no comment as to what it related to (could be anything) and he does receive documents from multiple sources (people rarely send me anything unfortunately). Perhaps he shouldn't tease and should be super careful with his language but he doesn't owe City fans anything.
He said it was related to inflated sponsorships, very very detailed and intriguing. I am assuming he isn't an idiot, so he must know what he is doing. If nothing else, it's probably guaranteed him a few more appearances on some dreadful websites, or at least some headlines.
TonyColemansbagofapples
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 6,530
All this talk and counter talk and my position is still the same. The champagne is on ice.
This latest flare up is a little ridiculous. Maguire has seen a document (he wouldn't lie), he said it was very detailed, made no comment as to what it related to (could be anything) and he does receive documents from multiple sources (people rarely send me anything unfortunately). Perhaps he shouldn't tease and should be super careful with his language but he doesn't owe City fans anything.
This whole thing is basically about out of context documents, so what is the point him announcing that he's seen an out of context document? He should know better.
Last edited:
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 20,344
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
Probably just outgunned the sheer weight of nonsense to the contrary from PL and usual media suspects tbh. Blue specs on obviously.I think the initial statement after the APT case and subsequent press briefings got our point across well.
What do you feel we could have done differently?
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
Well done for utilising the rarely used and much maligned term 'hundredthly'
In my anger I spelt it wrong. Corrected now :D
Nephin Man
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Feb 2025
- Messages
- 238
- Team supported
- Manchester City
With due respect to the very cogent arguments from much more learned contributors than I am, I'm going to go out on a limb by saying I believe City will prevail in correlation with APT 1 and 2. I just do not believe that Pep would have extended his contract and been so bullish in press conferences, that Haaland would've signed a 10 year contract, that £200m would've been spent in January, or that there would be the development of the stadium with more collaborators coming on board without supreme confidence in the club's position. The collaborators presumably do due diligence! I get supreme confidence is asking to be brought down to earth with a great big thud, but this City ownership will have done due diligence at the outset too. It has elite lawyers on the board of directors. The alternative is that we are witnessing one of the greatest confidence tricks in business history.
So while it may be that the Tribunal hasn't yet reached a decision - and we don't know if that is the case - I believe it's possible City know the law as well as anyone, which has arguably been corroborated by CAS and APT 1 and 2. On that basis, I also believe it's possible for the club to know the strength or weakness of its position, and, even without a final decison, for the media to have been aware of it too and not say so.
As became apparent with the APT 1 decision, for 17 long years the media had managed to avoid consideration of open-ended interest-free loans from a club's ownership in its FFP/PSR/APT/XYZ fest, with go-to figures like Kieran Maguire for some reason or other continuing to be invited onto mainstream outlets to pontificate about FFP and the dangers of gambling in Football while sidelining that the club he supports is financed by a gambling empire that has lent itself deadline-free £400m in interest-free loans. And now I'm reading, at the 11th hour, he's suddenly talking about seeing documents not in the public domain that allegedly show City's sponsorships are inflated. Where have they appeared from as if by magic like Mr. Benn? Should City prevail, hopefully one consequence will be the end of some of these shysters.
So while it may be that the Tribunal hasn't yet reached a decision - and we don't know if that is the case - I believe it's possible City know the law as well as anyone, which has arguably been corroborated by CAS and APT 1 and 2. On that basis, I also believe it's possible for the club to know the strength or weakness of its position, and, even without a final decison, for the media to have been aware of it too and not say so.
As became apparent with the APT 1 decision, for 17 long years the media had managed to avoid consideration of open-ended interest-free loans from a club's ownership in its FFP/PSR/APT/XYZ fest, with go-to figures like Kieran Maguire for some reason or other continuing to be invited onto mainstream outlets to pontificate about FFP and the dangers of gambling in Football while sidelining that the club he supports is financed by a gambling empire that has lent itself deadline-free £400m in interest-free loans. And now I'm reading, at the 11th hour, he's suddenly talking about seeing documents not in the public domain that allegedly show City's sponsorships are inflated. Where have they appeared from as if by magic like Mr. Benn? Should City prevail, hopefully one consequence will be the end of some of these shysters.
Last edited:
richards30
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 May 2009
- Messages
- 31,734
He said it was related to inflated sponsorships, very very detailed and intriguing. I am assuming he isn't an idiot, so he must know what he is doing. If nothing else, it's probably guaranteed him a few more appearances on some dreadful websites, or at least some headlines.
Exactly! His tone to us also changed when we won against shareholder loans which will impact his beloved Brighton?
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
Should City prevail, hopefully one consequence will be the end of some of these shysters.
Amen to that (and I classify myself as a shyster on this thread).
eastmanc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 10,209
- Team supported
- Manchester city
Good point.Exactly! His tone to us also changed when we won against shareholder loans which will impact his beloved Brighton?
TonyColemansbagofapples
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 6,530
You're a very good shyster though.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
You're a very good shyster though.
Not sure that's meant as a compliment, but I'll take it as one :)
He didn't mention sponsorships. And shareholder loans will have immaterial impact on Brighton (only a small amount of shareholder loan is interest free and they have loads of capacity)Exactly! His tone to us also changed when we won against shareholder loans which will impact his beloved Brighton?
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,890
He didn't mention sponsorships. And shareholder loans will have immaterial impact on Brighton (only a small amount of shareholder loan is interest free and they have loads of capacity)
"Well, this is the accusation which has come from Tebas that Manchester City have artificially inflated their revenues by disguising money from the owners. I have seen some very, very detailed documents which are not in the public domain relating to this, and that's quite intriguing content. I can't go into any details about it".
HelloCity
Well-Known Member
"Well, this is the accusation which has come from Tebas that Manchester City have artificially inflated their revenues by disguising money from the owners. I have seen some very, very detailed documents which are not in the public domain relating to this, and that's quite intriguing content. I can't go into any details about it".
Wouldn't be surprised if it was just a piece of 'analysis' done by our rivals.
richards30
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 May 2009
- Messages
- 31,734
"Well, this is the accusation which has come from Tebas that Manchester City have artificially inflated their revenues by disguising money from the owners. I have seen some very, very detailed documents which are not in the public domain relating to this, and that's quite intriguing content. I can't go into any details about it".
Exactly, another look at me comment but saying nothing.