Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob
We all know that the main thrust of this action was that City were supposedly hiding where equity came from and were funding through related parties.
I suggest anybody in any doubt of the outcome read the conclusion in paragraph 289 of the report. I know this doesn't fit the narrative, but there you go.
The media don't seem to be reporting the most significant part of the document (I don't know why) - anybody reading the BBC / Daily mail / Guardian headlines would think that UEFA won the case.
|
Wait ... are you suggesting the BBC are anti-City ??
The main thrust of the action was there is no way City were capable of getting a £400M 10 year sponsorship deal from Etihad legitimately ( which made them the most lucrative club on the planet ) and also no reason for Etihad to keep increasing that deal during the 10 years ( when there is zero evidence of anyone else trying to outbid them ).
As others have said .... all it has shown is that you can cheat, as much as you want under FFP, as long as you stall UEFA long enough. Some clubs will try to continue to do that ( the press will have you believe that City are able to spend another £250M this window, even in the current climate, when none of the other - vastly more successful clubs - are. Maybe their is another litter bin ADUG can sponsor ?
), the vast majority will continue to play by the rules. And still be better
If UEFA have any sense they will be putting non-compliance on the same level as guilt ( punishable by immediate expulsion ) and make the acceptance of the new rule a requirement for inclusion from immediate effect.
Threaded Mode
