So, Jean-Luc Dehaene, the head of UEFA'S financial control panel, says that they are going to "look into" the Etihad sponsorship deal. For those not familiar with the set up, Citeh are sponsored by Etihad - the national airline of Abu-Dhabi. In an "unusual" deal Etihad are to sponsor not just The stadium, and the shirts, but also a 210 acre sports campus, which is exempt from FFP rules. Any income however, is not. Dehaene says that his panel will be on the lookout to see if clubs are "looking for loopholes" and says, "we will act" City made losses totalling £214mm for the years 2008-9 & 2009-10. Last years figures are due in September; since their takeover in 2008 by an Abu Dhabi based consortium headed by Sheikh Mansour. The first assessment by the authorities of the new rules will take place at the end of 2013-14; and clubs will initially be allowed to make a loss of Eur 45mm over three years, starting from this season. As we can see, City have quite a way to go to get back inside those new rules. Their "Sponsorship", as mentioned, is from Etihad, who are state owned. Their head is the very same Sheikh Mansour. Who, by coincidence, just happens to be the half brother of Sheikh Khalifa. The ruler, or dictator, if you prefer of Abu Dhabi. In the circumstances, let's all sincerely hope that Mr Dehaene and his panel don't need pipes and deerstalkers to find a conflict of interest - and possibly a fairly large "loophole" in City's arrangements.
They must do something about this. If they don't they'll have killed off their new rules before they can take effect and instead of preventing super rich owners chucking money at a club with no intention of making any back, they will do the exact opposite as only the super rich are able to use the loopholes.
I won't hold my breath on this one. These things have a way of working out favourably for the person/group who has great financial clout.
Nobody else is still shelling out like they, those close to it have said their business is done, but City still want 2 more! ...I don;t care what anyone says they obviously think they've found a way round whats coming. Whether the authorities investigating have the balls to expose it we'll see...maybe we can get FIFA to look into it and come up with fuk all!
What gets me, Luke, is that this one is just so blatant. I mean, how blind do you have to be, not to see the glaringly obvious, here? It's almost as if Citeh are daring UEFA to challenge them.
Will they simply buy UEFA (in the nicest possible way of course) PSG & Malaga seem to have joined the club of wealthy benfactors. Almost as if these coming rules will not apply to them. Will the European restraint of trade rules once again come to the aid of the super rich al la Kerry Packer. UEFA have a serious fight on their hands, let's hope they are up for the fight.
When the authority of an alleged governing body is being so blatantly challenged, as it seems that it is now, then they must either meet that challenge head on; or concede that their authority means nothing, and that effectively, they are powerless. Not to mention gutless! If that happens, then the doors will be wide open to almost anything, and everything.
I understand what you're saying, Luke. Obviously, any kind of proxy sponsorship deal, such as you have described, would be extremely difficult - if not impossible - to trace back to it's roots. However, City & Abu Dhabi (their real owners) haven't even shown enough respect to UEFA & their rules to try and be even a little bit discreet. The current overt, in your face, "sponsorship deal" smacks of a direct challenge to UEFA, and it's authority. It is an affront, that in my view, they cannot afford to ignore.
The problem being that the last time they came down on someone blatantly breaking the rules, in this case Chelsea's shenanigans to sign Gael Kakuta and subsequent transfer ban, their ruling was challenged in the Court of Arbitration for Sport and overturned. UEFA need more lawyers, obviously...
It looks to me as if UEFA are trying their best but the rich clubs will always find a loophole as they can afford more and better lawyers. UEFA seem to be getting unwarranted stick as part of the fallout against FIFA. This morning there was stuff on the radio about UEFA not being able to be clear about what Wenger's touchline ban meant in terms of communicating via a third party. As usual looking at the rules tells you all you need to know: "UEFA disciplinary regulations 2011 edition Article 70 Ordinary enforcement of suspensions A team manager/coach who is suspended from carrying out his function may follow the match for which he is suspended from the stands only. He may not enter the dressing room, tunnel or technical area before or during the match, nor may he communicate with his team."
The problem is that, because Mourinho got away with it a few years back, they've weakened their stance by not throwing the book, a couple of lamp shades and a hat stand at him.
envy, is an unattractive emotion, I'm supprised that you lot are not pleased that we are breaking the stranglehold held by your two neibours, the scum and the scouse for years and years. Three points, we are not the biggest spenders in the last 2 windows, the money we spend stays in the game, unlike the Glaziers, the scum's line up last week cost more than ours. so give us a break and good luck for the season. ps I was there in 81 when your 2 argies entertained us all.
Obnoxiousness is an unattractive character trait. And now we can expect it from both sides of Manchester. Joy...
