PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[SatOnTheWall]

I reckon the crackpot would have changed his outfits for each identity…..

Proper Norman Bates stuff.

 

[M18CTID]

I particularly enjoyed the little drama between the alter egos to try and persuade everyone they were different people. Classic psycopathy. Serious issues going on there.

Somewhat bizarrely, while that "spat" was going on, Nick Harris mysteriously unblocked me from Twitter despite having me blocked for the past few years, whereas Magic Twat blocked me!

 

[KS55]

If we get the verdict, I would hope that the club dumps the legal charges on the PL.

CFG are paying.

 

[KS55]

Somewhat bizarrely, while that "spat" was going on, Nick Harris mysteriously unblocked me from Twitter despite having me blocked for the past few years, whereas Magic Twat blocked me!

He’s schizo.

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Assuming no smoking gun, (which considering the number of PL leaks on other matters is highly unlikely) then I'm inclined to follow the logic of our main experts, and believe that ultimately City will be exonerated from the serious charges, essentially because:

1/CAS has already found in our favour
2/ The charges are so serious and the threshold so high that it will be virtually impossible to prove without reasonable doubt that City deliberately lied

However, I also believe that this will be reported in such a "no smoke without fire" shitstorm that the general consensus will be that City "got off" on a technicality

It won't particularly bother me, but those looking forward to our day in the sun, will be in for a shock.

 

[KS55]

The core allegation was that Etihad only directly contributed £8m, while the rest came from somewhere else. UEFA claimed it was from ADUG, therefore should be treated as equity investment. City & Etihad denied that, and presented evidence at CAS that this additional money had come from central Abu Dhabi funds, for marketing purposes, which CAS accepted as the truth.

Anyone who's followed my postings on here will hopefully confirm that I already knew that, via a document that was in the public domain via a court in New York that was hearing a case under the 'Open Skies Agreement'. This was a presentation which was prepared for Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed and explicitly stated that the Etihad sponsorship was being paid by the Abu Dhabi Executive Council. That's why I was quite confident we would beat UEFA at CAS, and that we'll beat the main substantive PL charge.

As to why varying amounts were paid under the Etihad contract, there was no explanation of that but my view (which was slightly supported by the leaked emails) was that we could call off what we wanted, when we wanted it, subject to the overall terms of the contract. I recall Nick Harris getting all giddy and saying that the Etihad contract was for far more than we said it was, due to the amounts paid in 2013, 2014 and 2016. He added those up and divided by 3, but there was nothing stated for 2015. So the assumption must be that either we received no cash from Etihad or relatively little, having called off additional cash in the previous years.

If Etihad were paying us £600m over 10 years, that doesn't have to mean they'll pay us £60m each and every year. We would probably declare £60m a year in the accounts but how the actual cash flows are structured is completely irrelevant.

The commission will have a very hard time proving otherwise. I think people have been led astray by the somewhat Heath Robinson start to the deal.

 

[Prophet of Doom]

Assuming no smoking gun, (which considering the number of PL leaks on other matters is highly unlikely) then I'm inclined to follow the logic of our main experts, and believe that ultimately City will be exonerated from the serious charges, essentially because:

1/CAS has already found in our favour
2/ The charges are so serious and the threshold so high that it will be virtually impossible to prove without reasonable doubt that City deliberately lied

However, I also believe that this will be reported in such a "no smoke without fire" shitstorm that the general consensus will be that City "got off" on a technicality

It won't particularly bother me, but those looking forward to our day in the sun, will be in for a shock.

We had a look in the crystal ball earlier in the week when Jeff Stelling asked ‘how would the football family react if we are found not guilty’.

They ain’t interested in us being cleared and the charges not holding.

Not interested in justice - just the angry mob looking for blood.

 

[remember arthur mann]

I also believe that this will be reported in such a "no smoke without fire" shitstorm that the general consensus will be that City "got off" on a technicality
It won't particularly bother me, but those looking forward to our day in the sun, will be in for a shock.

Yep, the Forest fan has been pushing the same agenda.

 

[KS55]

We've won it in 21,22,23 and 24, WHEN win it again in 25 that will be the ultimate piss take :-)

Corrected by Nostradamus.

 

[TheThirdDeano]

Does anyone know who this guy is

He’s a ****.
He obviously fancies himself a thinker and a writer but as we all know; brevity is the soul of wit so allow me to summarize his posts.

“City are guilty because I want them to be.”