Someone has finally said it.Martin Samuel, MailSport: "Whatever City have done wrong, the entire playing field was shaped by the elite of European football for their own gain. The game, as it has now been framed by UEFA and a privileged elite, is bent." [via @MailSport]
Our owner can pay our legal fees,there is no law against that if needs beThat's my point, the Club will be paying for any legal challenge.
UEFA have their own sponsors. If the shit hits their fan they will run for the hills.
I think we all secretly know what will happen. CAS will give us a reduced punishment, to appease UEFArce, and the ruling cartel clubs.
I can’t see a ‘fair and independent hearing’ being done, no matter what Sorriano thinks. This will open the gate for PL to try and stick their iron in the fire and get a points reduction.
Maybe our owners should now just dump a billion pound of debt on us, then carry on spending. It’s what the rags seem to be able to do without any scrutiny.
That's my point, the Club will be paying for any legal challenge.
David Conn on the guardian football weekly podcast after taking his magic mushrooms:
Manchester City have NOT been given this penalty because they breached FFP rules in the sense they made too much of a loss or their finances weren't what they should have bee, which obviously is what FFP is all about trying to make clubs live within their means and not make too much of a loss, but this is not what City have been found guilty.......
The issue is they were deceitful and not truthful when they said it was Etihad and not Sheikh Mansour the owner who was clearly paying £57mil.
It was a breach of trust which is always a worse offence than the offence itself...an example (but not a direct paralllel) is it is an offence if you get pulled for speeding you get 3 points on your licence and you might get a fine..but if you lie and you were driving the car when in fact your partner was driving the car well that becomes a very serious offence and you go to prison...so City are not being done for a breach of FFP they are being for a serious breach of trust"
No he has said we've done it. He quite deliberately said we have been found guilty of it, and then went on a rant about how disgusting and out of control it was for Manchester City to call into question the integrity of the two UEFA panels.
That's key to understanding Conn's position. His starting point is that we are definitely guilty and we are completely wrong to complain about fairness or lack of process or question independence of the decision.
That's why when @Prestwich_Blue shows him that ADUG didn't fund Etihad's deals, he doesn't say "Hmm that's at odds to what I saw in der spiegel and not exactly what we're hearing from UEFA", he says "It's just another way they are guilty".
That's bollocks since when did the owner of any business have to pay court costs out of the actual business itself?
A wealthy individual with several business interests can pay his lawyers from whatever means he has.
One thing I learnt listening to Prestwich Blues contribution on Ian Cheesmans blog is that new owners are now allowed by UEFA to invest in their club (not just infrastructure)
I think he mentioned 4 years
Was City offered the same latitude-I don’t think so.
Surely CAS will take this into consideration when dealing with our case otherwise they will comparing apples and oranges!