Jump to content
Naz17

Man City - the new bitters?

Recommended Posts

On 07/07/2021 at 18:50, Bobby Hundreds said:

Imagine a woman saying fuck me like that. Grammar is my downfall.

Hahaha - that got me that mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck! Outspent by west ham, brighton, spurs, wolves, villa and everton! Even plucky fulham just missed outspending us by £12m or so. They all must have won shitloads of Premier League and European titles! What are we doing wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, belarus said:

Hahaha - that got me that mate

Me too, I was around people at the time and started laughing. Thank the holy lord and all thats bright and beautiful, nobody asked me what I as laughing at. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Chairman Meow said:

 

It must be hard for the poor fella, after spending a couple of hundred million every season since he's been there it's really not fair on him. How can he be expected to compete under circumstances like that? They can't just rely on his genius every year and him dragging everything he can out of the tiny squad they've acquired. 

 

 

 

Yeah but you've got to take into account the state of the rag tag bunch of misfits that Guardiola walked in to in 2015.

They had no hopers like Aguero, Yaya Toure, Kompany and David Silva in the squad. It's incredible how he turned it round so quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

 

Yeah but you've got to take into account the state of the rag tag bunch of misfits that Guardiola walked in to in 2015.

They had no hopers like Aguero, Yaya Toure, Kompany and David Silva in the squad. It's incredible how he turned it round so quickly. 

Not like he had to turn Djimi Traore into a champions league winner 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, coachpotato said:

Easier to turn water into wine.

Pep would buy a vinery.  Easy. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Fuck! Outspent by west ham, brighton, spurs, wolves, villa and everton! Even plucky fulham just missed outspending us by £12m or so. They all must have won shitloads of Premier League and European titles! What are we doing wrong?

The question should be what could we be doing better. 

 

A solitary league and European

Cup for Jurgens time here would be a disgrace from FSG. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Just remembered they lost the CL final, put a smile on my face that did.

 

Happy Friday.

Then you remember Chelsea Oligarch bastards won. Thing is can't really see anything other than English winners for the foreseeable future, we have to be in that mix, there is going to be some unpalatable winners of it in coming seasons especially with Real and Barca being fucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Then you remember Chelsea Oligarch bastards won. Thing is can't really see anything other than English winners for the foreseeable future, we have to be in that mix, there is going to be some unpalatable winners of it in coming seasons especially with Real and Barca being fucked.

We should be seeing it as an opportunity to bag a few more. Instead we're happy just to take the pay day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/07/2021 at 09:09, Bobby Hundreds said:Thing is can't really see anything other than English winners for the foreseeable future, we have to be in that mix, there is going to be some unpalatable winners of it in coming seasons especially with Real and Barca being fucked.

To be completely cynical, I can’t see UEFA allowing English clubs to dominate like we did in the 70’s/80’s. Not good for the “family” to have one country hoovering up the CL, Europa and possibly the new comp they’ve dreamed up. Although the way City fucked them over FFP it’s not easy to see how they’d stop it.

Maybe a Super League?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/07/2021 at 08:36, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

Guardiola and centre backs, buy him, shit,  buy him, shit. £400m later gets a good one. Genius.

 

see also 'Guardiola and full backs'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dave u said:

 

see also 'Guardiola and full backs'.

Has he actually bought anyone that's really made a difference for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/07/2021 at 08:39, Bruce Spanner said:

Just remembered they lost the CL final, put a smile on my face that did.

 

Happy Friday.

Have this, happy Saturday. Always cheers me up this. 

Screenshot_20210527-124947_Samsung Internet.jpg

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/07/2021 at 14:58, m0e said:

Has he actually bought anyone that's really made a difference for them?

The keeper has improved them. Dias had a good opening season. Gundogen has been a decent signing, laporte was good till his injury and zinchenko has been great value. The rest have been pretty underwhelming 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmmm!

 

It was late morning on Tuesday April 12, 2011, when a senior executive within the sports sponsorship team at Etihad Airways composed an email to a business contact working in the 'partnerships' department at Manchester City.

It was a month before Manchester United under Sir Alex Ferguson would win their 19th English top-division league title, surpassing Liverpool's record of 18. Chelsea would be runners-up on 71 points that season, just ahead of City, also with 71.

City, then managed by Roberto Mancini, had extended their wait for a first title since 1968 to 43 years, but with a core of influential players including Joe Hart, Vincent Kompany, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Gareth Barry, James Milner and Carlos Tevez — joint winner of the Premier League Golden Boot along with Dimitar Berbatov — they appeared to be knocking on the door of a real renaissance.

The Etihad exec began their email: 'Dear [XXX] … there seems to be some confusion about an outstanding balance of the sponsorship fee for the 2010/11 season.'

The Mail on Sunday knows the identities of both the sender and the principal recipient of the email but neither works for the same company any more and both moved to different spheres of business.

'As you are aware,' the writer continued, 'Etihad's commitment is for £4million and the remaining balance (£8m) is handled separately by the [UAE] Executive Affairs Authority. Please can you clarify this to your accounts department and pick it up direct with the EAA in due course. Kind regards.'

To put this into context, The Mail on Sunday has been told — and has seen corroborative paperwork — that Manchester City invoiced Etihad for £12m for the 2010-11 shirt sponsorship deal, but the invoice had a hand-written annotation that Etihad themselves were only due to pay £4m that year.

Further to that, sources say, and documents show, is that the City-Etihad shirt deal at the time — signed by City's then CEO, Garry Cook, and Etihad's CEO, James Hogan — would cost Etihad £4m in the 2010-11 season, having cost them £3m the season before, and then £4.5m in 2011-12.

 

The EAA, who were picking up the difference between the headline £12m in 2010-11 and the £4m Etihad were paying, are according to their website 'a specialised government agency mandated to provide strategic policy advice to the Chairman of the Abu Dhabi Executive Council, His Highness Sheik Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces'.

Correspondence seen by the MoS and supported by contemporary paperwork suggests Etihad were not in fact paying the amounts City were invoicing for but a UAE entity serving Sheik Mohamed was.

City have allegedly benefited from abnormally high sponsorship details from entities based in the UAE, in deals that appear to have contravened FFP rules. If money was being funnelled into City to artificially inflate their income for years, that would be a problem.

And various emails and documents obtained by Football Leaks and/or this newspaper suggest that happened. The Premier League announced an investigation more than two years ago but that has so far been delayed by City's actions in court. City have declined to clarify multiple issues around this. 

Fast forward to early summer of 2014 and a source close to City emailed the MoS and claimed that Etihad's 10-year £340m sponsorship with City was not in fact mainly funded by Etihad but rather through Etihad and that a state entity was picking up most of the tab.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

City's legal battle with the Premier League could still end in massively contrasting ways, from full exoneration of any wrongdoing to a severe punishment including points deductions and fines. 

Scenario 1: City finally comply fully with the PL probe and hand over all requested documents and information and this clears them of any wrongdoing. No punishment.

Scenario 2: City continue not to cooperate and the Premier League has insufficient evidence to do anything but sanction them for that. CAS levied a €10m fine for this in the UEFA case.

Scenario 3: City comply fully with the Premier League probe and hand over all requested documents and information and it helps the PL find them liable of wrongdoing and they are punished.

Scenario 4: City don't cooperate but the PL get evidence from other sources. They charge City with breaches of rules and a disciplinary process ends in exoneration or punishment.

 
Around the same time — and this is when City had just been found guilty of breaking UEFA Financial Fair Play [FFP] rules for the first time — the MoS was made aware of some disquiet within Etihad's sports sponsorship team about the airline's relationship with City. A source who knows an employee on that team said the airline's targeted sports sponsorship deals to then had followed the same formula.

This involved relatively low spending on tie-ups with teams or venues in places where sports franchises were either on Etihad flight paths to major airports (Harlequins rugby, both codes, on the Heathrow flightpath; and in Melbourne, in football and Aussie Rules, on the Melbourne flightpath), or would be in flight paths (tie-ups in New York soccer, and three sports teams in Washington, all of which happened). 

While Manchester airport is an Etihad destination, there were private concerns Etihad should not be doing a huge-money deal with one club if the targeted strategy to date was going to be consistent, sources say.

The MoS spoke to City in summer 2014 about the allegations and was told they could not be confirmed by the club. The sources declined to go on the record and no story ran. 

Fast forward again to summer 2020 and City had been banned from the Champions League for two seasons by UEFA for, among other things, 'disguised funding' of sponsorship deals, in other words, for saying a sponsor was paying 100 per cent of an agreed endorsement when in fact another entity was picking up some of the tab.

The case was now at the appeal stage at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and among those giving evidence on behalf of City was Simon Pearce, who holds multiple posts within the entities that ultimately run City.

Pearce is a non-executive City director and on the board of parent company, City Football Group (CFG), which also owns Melbourne City, where he is the vice-chairman. He is also a director of several City subsidiary companies as well as a senior adviser to the UAE's Executive Affairs Authority.

At the CAS tribunal last year, Pearce was asked: 'Have you ever arranged any payments to be made to Etihad in relation to its sponsorship obligations of Manchester City Football Club?'.

He answered: 'Absolutely, categorically not.'

The official CAS verdict document reported: 'Mr Pearce did not strike the panel as being an unreliable witness and indeed upholding UEFA's allegations would necessarily require a finding that his testimony was false. The panel does not find such conclusion to be warranted in the absence of evidence being presented by UEFA that Mr Pearce in fact represented ADUG [a company controlled by Sheik Mansour].'

Yet days after the CAS verdict cleared City of 'disguised funding' and handed them a fine of 10million euros for non-cooperation with UEFA, the German magazine Der Spiegel published hitherto unseen material that suggested Pearce had provided evidence to CAS that conflicted with previous claims.

The whole case against City by UEFA had started with the publication in 2018 of a series of emails by Der Spiegel purporting to show wrong-doing by City. The ongoing Premier League investigation into City is based on the same Der Spiegel materials.

The post-CAS bombshell email published by Der Spiegel last year is dated December 16, 2013, from Pearce (using his EAA email address) and sent to Peter Baumgartner, then the chief operating officer (COO) of Etihad. As our graphic shows, Pearce appears to be admitting that he had in fact arranged a payment to Etihad in relation to its sponsorship obligations to City.

The email details how 'we' (City) 'should be receiving £99m — of which you [Etihad] will provide £8m. I therefore should have forwarded £91m and instead have sent you only £88.5m. I effectively owe you £2.5m.'

The Mail on Sunday has asked the club a series of questions arising from this correspondence and they declined to answer any specific queries. Instead they pointed us to previous statements.

In relation to the Pearce email, they said: 'The questions and matters raised appear to be a cynical attempt to publicly re- litigate and undermine a case that has been fully adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.'

The club have also claimed of Der Spiegel's reports over years: 'The attempt to damage the club's reputation is organised and clear.' Asked to confirm who has organised this, a City spokeswoman failed to respond. 

After last week's rulings by three of Britain's most senior judges that City have stymied the Premier League's investigation, City said: 'We respect the decision of the Court of Appeal regarding the arbitration matter. This decision relates to ongoing proceedings and we are not in a position to provide comment until those proceedings are complete.'

City's position then is that they have broken no rules. Yet now it can be revealed that, in an argument the club put before a court, they admitted the Premier League apparently suspected there was evidence of wrongdoing. 'The Premier League contends that the [media] reports contain information suggesting breaches of the rules,' said City's legal team.

The Premier League declined to respond to questions and their last comment on the subject, in 2019 and still applicable, is that their investigation is ongoing.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-9821921/The-smoking-gun-emails-prove-Manchester-City-did-cheat-Premier-League-FFP-rules.html

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×