PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

OrigamiNinja said:
Only in football is change frowned upon. “You don’t have X history, so you’re not allowed to win things or earn more than Y club”. Can you imagine that being applied in other sectors? Apple nearly went bankrupt in the 90s. Amazon didn’t even exist until the mid 90s. Twitter…founded 2006, sold 16 years later for $44bn.

It blows my mind when you hear people like Spitty talking about football finance and how it’s impossible that City can earn more than Real Madrid and the rest. Football clubs from a business standpoint earn fuck all given their worldwide popularity. United talk about having 600m fans…ok, why isn’t your turnover in the multiple billions? There are thousands of companies around the world that 99.9% of people haven’t heard of, whose turnover will dwarf any football club. It tells you that football was/is crying out for visionaries who can take it to a new level but try to tell a United/Liverpool/Arsenal fan that the visionary is Mansour/City and they’ll be straight on their Amazon purchased Apple iPad to tell all and sundry on Twitter, that it’s impossible that PL and CL winners Manchester City can earn a whole £160m more than Tottenham for the same accounting period. Tottenham.
Click to expand...
But but but they won the double in 1961!
 
BerkshireBlue said:
ah so you're applying 2024/25 rules to 2009 to 2013 charges. I see where you've gone completely wrong.

here's the actual rule from the handbooks in question for the period.

View attachment 133095

As you can clearly see this is a slam dunk for city as it doesn't mention anything about renumeration or not having seperate contracts whatsoever. Case closed
Click to expand...

:D No capital letters, poor grammar, lousy punctuation, spelling mistakes. If you are a lawyer, I'm a Dutchman.

Anyway, I am done. Won't bore people further.
 
OrigamiNinja said:
Only in football is change frowned upon. “You don’t have X history, so you’re not allowed to win things or earn more than Y club”. Can you imagine that being applied in other sectors? Apple nearly went bankrupt in the 90s. Amazon didn’t even exist until the mid 90s. Twitter…founded 2006, sold 16 years later for $44bn.

It blows my mind when you hear people like Spitty talking about football finance and how it’s impossible that City can earn more than Real Madrid and the rest. Football clubs from a business standpoint earn fuck all given their worldwide popularity. United talk about having 600m fans…ok, why isn’t your turnover in the multiple billions? There are thousands of companies around the world that 99.9% of people haven’t heard of, whose turnover will dwarf any football club. It tells you that football was/is crying out for visionaries who can take it to a new level but try to tell a United/Liverpool/Arsenal fan that the visionary is Mansour/City and they’ll be straight on their Amazon purchased Apple iPad to tell all and sundry on Twitter, that it’s impossible that PL and CL winners Manchester City can earn a whole £160m more than Tottenham for the same accounting period. Tottenham.
Click to expand...
Deserves more than a like from me. Bravo!
 
terraloon said:
Not saying that at all nor am I saying that it would be wrong for Mancini to have a standalone contract with another entity or indeed that Mancini’s company haven’t properly accounted for the income , in Italy, for tax purposes.
The issues are:
1) Was there within the PL / FA rules at that point a requirement for City to lodge at PL /FA full details of a managers remuneration package. Clearly the PL believe there was.
Click to expand...
Here's what it says in the PL Rules for 2011/12, when Mancini was in place for the season:

Contracts of Employment and Registration
7. No Club shall employ any person as a Manager unless and until:
7.1 the terms of the Manager’s employment have been evidenced in a written contract of
employment between the Club and the Manager; and
7.2 the Manager’s contract of employment has been registered with the Secretary.

Contents of Contracts of Employment
8. Contracts of employment between a Club and a Manager shall:
8.1 include the standard clauses set out in Appendix 8;
8.2 clearly set out the circumstances in which the contract of employment may be
determined by either party.

Nothing in there about full details of remuneration. There are rules about declaring material transactions over £25k so if City paid Mancini under his Al Jazira contract and didn't declare it as a material transaction, there's chance we may have broken that rule, but we haven't been charged under that rule so that's immaterial. It's those rules above P7 and P8, that we have been charged with breaching.
 
OrigamiNinja said:
Only in football is change frowned upon. “You don’t have X history, so you’re not allowed to win things or earn more than Y club”. Can you imagine that being applied in other sectors? Apple nearly went bankrupt in the 90s. Amazon didn’t even exist until the mid 90s. Twitter…founded 2006, sold 16 years later for $44bn.

It blows my mind when you hear people like Spitty talking about football finance and how it’s impossible that City can earn more than Real Madrid and the rest. Football clubs from a business standpoint earn fuck all given their worldwide popularity. United talk about having 600m fans…ok, why isn’t your turnover in the multiple billions? There are thousands of companies around the world that 99.9% of people haven’t heard of, whose turnover will dwarf any football club. It tells you that football was/is crying out for visionaries who can take it to a new level but try to tell a United/Liverpool/Arsenal fan that the visionary is Mansour/City and they’ll be straight on their Amazon purchased Apple iPad to tell all and sundry on Twitter, that it’s impossible that PL and CL winners Manchester City can earn a whole £160m more than Tottenham for the same accounting period. Tottenham.
Click to expand...
Excellent post
 
117 M34 said:
Presumably the bill for the city case will be paid for out of this season's revenue.
Wonder what the newly promoted clubs think about that after the PL spent 4 years investigating
Click to expand...
Things may change now or after the hearing but I would be of the opinion that promoted clubs would have had no say whatsoever in how the PL was run. Such was the stranglehold the red tops had on how the PL was run. City win and the red tops bullying their way to the money is halfway over. Scruffy Jim is already distancing himself from the fight, a bit like most bullies when someone is prepared to go toe to toe with them.
 
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.