cheekbid's don 't you know the bosses at the Premier League think that what Dippers, Rags, and the Arsen say it is always right. Even if they know that what they are saying is a pack of lies.
Conn doesn't like Citizens anymore!
We lost the battle of fan opinion 12 years ago the day we got taken over.
And has only got worse since we have been successful . Jealousy is at the root .
He does like a human rights issue though, just not if you are a palestinian in the Gaza.
A quiet hypocrite I can live with , but con is a noisy one.
Doesn't like money in football, earns his money from football.
Very much this. A look at social media already has every other fan saying we will have paid them off. Fuck em, let them choke on it.It's definitely in doubt.
If we win, everyone else will think it's bent.
If they win, half this forum will go to their graves claiming CAS is bent.
I know he can't comment on the case but his wording suggests he's distancing himself as far as possible from the decision that was made.MUG carry an interview with Ceferin: https://www.dumptheguardian.com/foo...ball-with-fans-will-come-back-very-soon#img-1
Covered city briefly:
Before the Covid-19 crisis there was the case and sanction of Manchester City. Is Uefa still supporting the chamber’s findings? Are you still fully behind the guilty verdict and the two-year ban?
Look, the decision was made and now the case is at the court of arbitration for sport and Cas will decide. That’s absolutely all I can say, for two reasons. Firstly, the independent bodies made the decision, I didn’t, and secondly, I really don’t know the case [well enough] and I don’t like people who comment about matters that they don’t know well. There are too many people commenting on different topics that they do not have a clue about.
So the possibility of a deal or a settlement outside court is not an issue for you?
I don’t want to comment on this case any more.
This article makes no reference at all to the fact we have already been punished for failing the break even test over this time period. Our accounts were presumably signed off by auditors at the time and accepted by UEFA and the PL. What evidence does The Athletic have that we "falsified our accounts." That evidence is not in any of the Der Spiegel emails.
So the Athletic is effectively accusing City and our Auditors of committing a criminal offence. I hope they have good lawyers.
Cerefin's comments today again distance UEFA from the 'independent' bodies who found us guilty. Both City and Uefa are making provision for an outcome that gives both sides no loss of face?
When this is all over can we not get a £500m loan from the sheik with little or no interest payable when we feel like it? Surely that is a way of circumventing FFP in the future and be like our red friends
When this is all over can we not get a £500m loan from the sheik with little or no interest payable when we feel like it? Surely that is a way of circumventing FFP in the future and be like our red friends
I don’t think the Sheik has any interest in circumventing FFP and he wants us but mainly the CFG group to be self sustaining.When this is all over can we not get a £500m loan from the sheik with little or no interest payable when we feel like it? Surely that is a way of circumventing FFP in the future and be like our red friends
Prestwich Blue could answer better than me but I thought that the overall loss figure was not disputed. We didn't like the process but admitted we had breached fair play rules and paid the fine. The Der Spiegel allegations relate to where the money came from ie was it genuine sponsorship. I also thought the overall sponsorship figure was accepted as fair value.Lee's tweet says
"in the PL handbook it says that a club making a false statement/falsifying a doc in support of an application for a Uefa license will face action "
I thought that the whole charge is based on allegedly making a false statement to FFP requirements - that we did not tell UEFA that a lot more money came from the owner, when it actually did.
If in answer to "how much did the owner put in?", we said "50M" when actually it was "80M, 30M of which was funnelled through go-betweens" would be a false statement in the accounts (if both true and provable, of course!)
The auditors would presumably not have investigated beyond who gave City the money, and are outside all this.
Yes it would appear as debt but only the interest paid would be classed as an expenditureNo, that's not how it works. The loan would appear on the accounts.
Prestwich Blue could answer better than me but I thought that the overall loss figure was not disputed. We didn't like the process but admitted we had breached fair play rules and paid the fine. The Der Spiegel allegations relate to where the money came from ie was it genuine sponsorship. I also thought the overall sponsorship figure was accepted as fair value.
Of course we have not seen all the evidence but nothing in the hacked emails confirms where the money came from. As others have stated if we have bank statements and transfer details that would trump any comments in the emails, not least the confusion over the courtesy titles of His Royal Highness and who sent and received the emails.
I understand your point but would suggest that rather than "making false statements" in the accounts we may only be guilty of not providing all the documents. I hope this makes sense!
Yeah, agree. I assume our defence will reference other cases, but if it boils down to PSG got away with it so we should too, we’re in trouble.
From what I’ve read and understand, a lot is riding on what we described as “irrefutable evidence”. Pessimist in me wonders if this is irrefutable why hasn’t UEFA seen it? Optimist in me trusts in Khaldoon.
Yes if true then the reputational damage to both sets of auditors is huge. I have been confused all along by the UEFA case. They must have more than a few hacked emails.And if Der Spiegel’s allegations are true - then Etihad are also guilty of misreporting - which makes both the Clubs and Etihad auditors also guilty by association because both sets of accounts have been signed off. Keep thinking these allegations are so amateur but can it all be that simple?
We don't need money!When this is all over can we not get a £500m loan from the sheik with little or no interest payable when we feel like it? Surely that is a way of circumventing FFP in the future and be like our red friends