💻 @UtdDistrict | enquires: cain@utddistrict.co.uk
- Tweets 20,633
- Following 453
- Followers 5,919
- Likes 16,334
Cain Smith retweeted
🚨📸 | Carlos Baleba in action during the behind-closed-doors friendly vs Lausanne-Sport.
2
20
650
29,419
Mourinho had a teenage Diogo Dalot, Lee Grant and Fred… he might acc be second to SAF now
🚨 | Premier League investigators argued that Man City breached PSR limits by almost £100m in the 2017-18 season
[@TheAthleticFC / @jwhitey98]
25
1,643
I’d actually be pretty sad as a City fan. After all this time of them telling you to back them and not to worry, their only defence is to try and get off on a technicality. No actual defence to suggest they aren’t guilty
Manchester City will argue the so-called 'tagged' sponsorship payments (totalling £830m) came from the Abu Dhabi Government not their owner (ADUG). This applies to State-controlled entities such as Etihad and Etisalat. Yet Etihad has previously refuted AD Government funding as "false".
City can point to an internal report written for the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi in 2010 which concluded the Abu Dhabi Government did indeed cover the sponsorship of Manchester City. The report was not intended for external publication.
In their UEFA case, City denied the Etihad (or any other) sponsorship funds came from any other source other than a direct payment. Sheikh Mansour provided a letter which read: "I have not authorised ADUG to make any payments to Etihad, Etisalat or any of their affiliates in relation to their sponsorship of MCFC."
In 2015, the 'Partnership for Open and Fair Skies' wrote to the US departments of Commerce, Transportation and State arguing Etihad gained a competitive advantage due to receiving huge sums from the Abu Dhabi Government. They allude to the internal report referenced above, which appears to confirm this.
Yet Etihad's response was: "The assertion that the Abu Dhabi Government paid for Etihad’s sponsorship of English Premier League football club Manchester City is equally false.
"In 2011 Etihad and Manchester City entered into a 10-year sponsorship agreement, which included naming rights for Manchester City’s stadium. Etihad funded this sponsorship from its own liquidity. It is not uncommon for airlines to have sponsorships with sports teams and their venues."
Etihad's denial the Abu Dhabi Government helped pay for their sponsorship goes against City's core argument, according to the verdict, that "AD Sponsors had from time to time applied for financial assistance from the AD Government towards their liability to pay the Recorded Sponsorship Fees."
Due to redacted names, multiple sponsors, and the phrase 'from time to time', City could make a case for other sponsors, but Etihad's on-record denial doesn't help the club's position, according to multiple legal sources spoken to.
Worth also reiterating, the panel, having reviewed the evidence already provided, already concluded any notion the Abu Dhabi Government not ADUG paid the tagged sums was "concocted well after the event".
21
17
440
23,839
Too funny how this City thing has got rivals to start going “what about United’s owners! They’ve put the club into debt!”… yeah we’ve been trying to tell you this, acting like we love the Glazers 🤣🤣🤣
4
407
The argument about allowing owners to put whatever they want into their team worked when it was actually local people who didn’t have unlimited amounts of cash owning the clubs. You’re actually slow if you think these billionaires should just be able to pump whatever they want into making super teams.
3
9
884
We actually had that Quansah as our RB in the dying stages of a World Cup semi-final hahahahahahhahaha
1
4
1,216
Cain Smith retweeted
That damn red cartel not letting a small amount of £900m be swept under the carpet. It’s a conspiracy I tell ya
2
48
663
12,219
Cain Smith retweeted
When I wrote about this image rights sham for The Independent in 2018, Manchester City threatened to sue us and demanded I tweet out a personal apology on here. We fought them. They did not sue us.
City's sham is confirmed by the Premier League today independent.co.uk/sport/foot…
221
5,629
30,329
1,058,324
HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHA
"Do you apologise to football fans? The Premier League says 'sham' contracts, is this a 'sham' club?"
@RobHarris questions Man City chief executive Ferran Soriano after the club was found guilty of all charges related to Premier League's financial rules
trib.al/YimvoPJ
7
142
2,864
653,788
I genuinely can't think of a worthy punishment for them... it's worse than anyone thought lol
2
1
6
1,345
Can that Sky Sports journalist who follows people around like a weirdo find Pep and actually do some good?
1
8
638
Remember, that 900m figure only goes to 2019. I genuinely wonder how much the total amount is
11
54
1,114
Why is everyone overreacting? David Ornstein still hasn't tweeted since and is clearly running scared because he went too early!!!
1
1
21
4,316
I thought Twitter had changed how monetisation worked?
Was hoping it might slightly fix the fake quotes and engagement bait everywhere
🚨 Erling Haaland on what he said to Rúben Dias after Norway’s defeat to Portugal:
🎙️ Reporter: “Erling, what did you say to Rúben Dias after the game? You looked absolutely furious.”
🗣️ Erling Haaland: “I have to be honest, Rúben. What Bernardo did was unacceptable.
“He’s my former teammate and I have a lot of respect for him, but I really didn’t like what he did to Martin.
“You can’t kick a player after the ball is gone. It’s football, it’s a competitive game, but there has to be a line. And what made it worse is that he didn’t even apologise afterwards.
“I’m not going to pretend everything is fine when I don’t feel that way. That’s why I didn’t hug him after the game.
“I told Rúben, ‘I respect Bernardo, but I can’t support what he did. Martin didn’t deserve that.’
“For me, it was unprofessional. You can be angry, you can compete, you can have arguments on the pitch, but you still have to respect your opponent.”
2
1,099
