I think the issue is with 115 comment is that its still an ongoing case so it could be true or could not be. There is a level of plausible deniability there from a legal standpoint which means they get away with it as frustrating as that may be.Interesting that Carragher was forced to apologise to Lord Sugar, following threats of legal action, after claiming that he'd left them in a mess when he stood down as Spurs chairman.
Yet how many times has he (and many others) said worse things about us without being challenged? Our club is weak and spineless, quite happy to threaten fans selling tickets but not those publicly slandering us.
Out of interest, where have you got this info from. It’s quite a statement to make if it’s NOT just your opinion. Are you including the reaction after we won the treble & 4 PLs in this period?I’m not convinced by this. Whilst I do think the club is focussed on growing globally, I don’t think our fanbase has increased as it should over the last few years and I think that is at least partly down to the fact that we are seen as the cheating, empty seat club by the sort of people who get their football info from TikTok etc.
I think the damage caused by this case has been almost immeasurable.
Stats / source to support your assertion DD?I’m not convinced by this. Whilst I do think the club is focussed on growing globally, I don’t think our fanbase has increased as it should over the last few years and I think that is at least partly down to the fact that we are seen as the cheating, empty seat club by the sort of people who get their football info from TikTok etc.
I think the damage caused by this case has been almost immeasurable.
Yes it was Redknapp. I realised that after I posted it. Amended now.Wasn't it Redknapp ?
We've got the CAS verdict to fall back on for one thing. But if people are calling us cheats, it's up to them to prove it when challenged. We only need to take one down.I think the issue is with 115 comment is that its still an ongoing case so it could be true or could not be. There is a level of plausible deniability there from a legal standpoint which means they get away with it as frustrating as that may be.
Redknapps little outburst was to do with something that could be demonstrably proved to be false so he didnt have a leg to stand on tbf.
Brilliant post, well done, it’s certainly lifted my spirits this morning, thank you.Yet we have signed a billion pound deal with puma, Haaland for 10 years and new stand and hotel development.
Ive said it loads of times we give the British press/media to much credit. They are not as powerful as some think, they pander to the red cartel in this country. That in the world City operate in is such a small percentage.
Do people really think something that a Roan etc writes will affect our business deals with multiple billion pound companies ?
The only people who read or listen to the British press/media are rags, dippers and gooners.
I have seen an increasing number of little kids in City tops around here, that's the age group that hopefully stay City fans. Any one older will already have a team so growing a fan base will take decades. Plus I dont think this age group is influenced by the press/media, more by winning and signing players like Haaland.
Now if the pl find that a member of a foreign Royal Family is a fraudster and a top political player like Khaldoon is also a fraudster, our top top accountants are fraudsters, the top people at Etihad Airways are fraudsters, plus the other top people in companies we have sponsorships with are also fraudsters, who knows what will happen next. But the pl had better have water tight prove that these top top people are fraudsters, because the pl are playing in the big league here not the micky mouse pl.
Remember Mssters was 4th choice and vetted by the rags and dippers, so he is in their pocket.
There’s a big difference though. Sugar could point to legally published (and unchallenged) accounts to prove Redknapp’s opinion was slanderous or libellous.Interesting that Jamie Redknapp was forced to apologise to Lord Sugar, following threats of legal action, after claiming that he'd left them in a mess when he stood down as Spurs chairman.
Yet how many times have others said worse things about us without being challenged? Our club is weak and spineless, quite happy to threaten fans selling tickets but not those publicly slandering us.
Jamie, not the bent dad.Yes it was Redknapp. I realised that after I posted it. Amended now.
The irony of a Redknapp accusing someone of leaving a club in a mess!
Hope you took the cash out of his hand and did it by bank transfer so the fucker had to pay tax on it.When I paid the kitchen fitter in cash he told me that’s how City pay Haaland whilst telling me he’s finding it hard hiding as he’s got that much. I said that imagine having to hide £500k in cash every week……
Yep, but PB did say "a Redknapp".Jamie, not the bent dad.
I agree with this. As has been said before, the process is the punishment. Reputational damage rather than points deductions and high level sanctions.I’m not convinced by this. Whilst I do think the club is focussed on growing globally, I don’t think our fanbase has increased as it should over the last few years and I think that is at least partly down to the fact that we are seen as the cheating, empty seat club by the sort of people who get their football info from TikTok etc.
I think the damage caused by this case has been almost immeasurable.
Thanks. Saved me saying it.Yep, but PB did say "a Redknapp"
It works both ways. You (or anyone else) cannot quantify how much our supporter base has truly grown over the past decade. Likewise, no-one can prove how much the growth has been stunted by the stigma of the ongoing case.Out if interest, where have you got this info from. It’s quite a statement to make if it’s NOT just your opinion. Are you including the reaction after we won the treble & 4 PLs in this period?
My experience when travelling is that City fans and shirts are dominant & other than the usual RM & Barca shirts (which have reduced since Messi left) - we’re out there
Sadly it's a regular line thrown out by our detractors, and typical of the racist undertones some people feel towards our club and owners.“Blood money”?
Whose blood is it?
Fuhrer
Sadly it's a regular line thrown out by our detectors, and typical of the racist undertones some people feel towards our club and owners.
Again - reputational damage.
In monetary terms its far more than a major part, its over 90% of it, nothing else compares remotely, not Etisalat and certainly not Mancini, Image rights (Fordham) and that old chestnut non cooperation. The fact that a 10 year £1b+ renewal has been approved by the PL for Etihad Airways is a screaming signal of how 115 has gone. If the IC say we should of put Mancini consultancy through the MCFC accounts (pre FFP) then the loss should of been £203m instead of £200m, in the year of our lord 2009 AD FFS....APT2 was settled because the PL acquised on the Etihad deal.
The Etihad deal was a major part of the "115 case".
Clearing a deal with which they're about to be told by a commission was fraudulent doesn't really make sense
Do you think our owners have enough legal action happening at the moment?Sadly it's a regular line thrown out by our detectors, and typical of the racist undertones some people feel towards our club and owners.
Again - reputational damage.