PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

ChicagoBlue said:
If City paid him, and it should have been reported but wasn’t, then that’s not good.

As for “boffins,” I appreciate their legal experience, but I prefer to make up my own mind on my feelings on all issues.
Click to expand...
I suspect the issue is whether the Al Jazira contract was 'disguised remuneration' from City, and should have been reported as such. PL will have to comfortably prove it was, but the fact City may have paid Al Jazira is probably not desperately relevant.

We already know that ADUG initially paid the Etisalat sponsorship, but it was made clear at CAS that this was (effectively) a loan, was recorded as such and Etisalat repaid that sometime later.

The Al Jazira contract certainly wasn't to get round FFP as (a) FFP wasn't in place when it was first signed and (b) our losses were so huge during the period of Mancini's tenure that the £1.75m was completely immaterial.
 
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue said:
I suspect the issue is whether the Al Jazira contract was 'disguised remuneration' from City, and should have been reported as such. PL will have to comfortably prove it was, but the fact City may have paid Al Jazira is probably not desperately relevant.

We already know that ADUG initially paid the Etisalat sponsorship, but it was made clear at CAS that this was (effectively) a loan, was recorded as such and Etisalat repaid that sometime later.

The Al Jazira contract certainly wasn't to get round FFP as (a) FFP wasn't in place when it was first signed and (b) our losses were so huge during the period of Mancini's tenure that the £1.75m was completely immaterial.
Click to expand...
Theyre basically trying to do us for a speeding ticket from before there were cars.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I suspect the issue is whether the Al Jazira contract was 'disguised remuneration' from City, and should have been reported as such. PL will have to comfortably prove it was, but the fact City may have paid Al Jazira is probably not desperately relevant.

We already know that ADUG initially paid the Etisalat sponsorship, but it was made clear at CAS that this was (effectively) a loan, was recorded as such and Etisalat repaid that sometime later.

The Al Jazira contract certainly wasn't to get round FFP as (a) FFP wasn't in place when it was first signed and (b) our losses were so huge during the period of Mancini's tenure that the £1.75m was completely immaterial.
Click to expand...
it may of been immaterial because of our losses, but did it still go against any of the rules that were in place at the time, , sorry PB im a bit hard of thinking :)
 
I often wonder if any members of the kangaroo court pop on here just to get any pointers of how to proceed. I know there are a lot of charges but come on 4years and counting to resolve this witch hunt is stupidly long.
 
Sir peace frog said:
it may of been immaterial because of our losses, but did it still go against any of the rules that were in place at the time, , sorry PB im a bit hard of thinking :)
Click to expand...
There were no FFP rules preventing this at the time. The important quote came from Mancini who said neither UEFA or the PL had ever been in touch with him about the matter, & he'd paid all relevant taxes on his remunerations.

The UEFA/PL query raised is from 2009. It beggars belief it's still being mooted as a possible issue in 2024.

It's no different to the Republicans still trying to find a reason to impeach Joe Biden because of spurious info accessed on his son's laptop. If they find dirt, then great, but the whole point of the exercise is to smear the intended target with shit, so their character stinks.

Mancini, his contracts & 99% of the 115 charges are merely a smear campaign to besmirch City & taint our success. If purely left up to UEFA or the PL's "rules", they'd have had us stitched up years ago.

This is why they desperately want to keep these investigations & tribunals in house & away from independent regulators & arbiters, because outside of their sphere of control, their accusations keep being shown up for the series of bullshit witchhunts they evidently are.
 
Dribble said:
There were no FFP rules preventing this at the time. The important quote came from Mancini who said neither UEFA or the PL had ever been in touch with him about the matter, & he'd paid all relevant taxes on his remunerations.

The UEFA/PL query raised is from 2009. It beggars belief it's still being mooted as a possible issue in 2024.

It's no different to the Republicans still trying to find a reason to impeach Joe Biden because of spurious info accessed on his son's laptop. If they find dirt, then great, but the whole point of the exercise is to smear the intended target with shit, so their character stinks.

Mancini, his contracts & 99% of the 115 charges are merely a smear campaign to besmirch City & taint our success. If purely left up to UEFA or the PL's "rules", they'd have had us stitched up years ago.

This is why they desperately want to keep these investigations & tribunals in house & away from independent regulators & arbiters, because outside of their sphere of control, their accusations keep being shown up for the series of bullshit witchhunts they evidently are.
Click to expand...
Please don't compare City to Joe Biden, for God's sake...
 
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.