PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

As Stefan says, yes it would. Unless the PL has evidence that we're not aware of, the related party question is potentially the only chink in our armour as far as the AD sponsorships are concerned. But it's a very, very small one.

And for the cynic in me, it's yet more corroboration that this isn't about the PL acting independently of its shareholders, nobly trying to ensure there is a level financial playing field in accordance with its rules and regulations. It's about our competitors trying to nail us in any small way they can.
This, they’ve probably targeted the Aabar and Etisalat deals, where Sheikh Mansour could be considered a related party.
 
Possibly. It at least needs to be transparent. The PL shoots itself in the foot with all this secrecy.
Obviously the question is, who allowed utd`s £40 million allowance for a share sale, were they authorized to do so, is it in the rules or was it, who else has had this allowance, and why did the Clubs not vote on it`s incorporation into the rules. I know SB was querying it on talksport a few weeks ago but it seems nothing else has been said.
 
Obviously the question is, who allowed utd`s £40 million allowance for a share sale, were they authorized to do so, is it in the rules or was it, who else has had this allowance, and why did the Clubs not vote on it`s incorporation into the rules. I know SB was querying it on talksport a few weeks ago but it seems nothing else has been said.

scrutinised for seconds……
 

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.