“I don’t think city will abuse this even if they win” 🙄🙄🙄 GMAFB. You think they’re gonna be like oh well thanks for the win, we’ll still be getting 20m for the shirts. How naive is this guy? They literally said they will have to “stop investing in the community and women’s team” because of it like some sort of threat.
Citys original sponsorship deal was 400mil for 10 years vs Arsenals 90mil for 15 years, CIty had at best a tenth of AFC fanbase and global pull so its simple math
the Lance Armstrong of football. They will always have an asterisk and if they aren't stripped of their ill gotten trophies, asterisks need to be official.
I get why you are trying to connect the two & it is an interesting comparison but i'm not sure it works . LA was the poster boy of cycling , his story , recovering from cancer etc was inspirational but when caught doping he was rightly scorned , his legacy was tainted & he was correctly stripped of his titles .The problem is everyone in cycling was doping at that time .. he just did it better than everyone else and that is where i believe your analogy dosen't quite work as it would mean that all Pl clubs are " financially doping " City have just been doing it better than all the rest & because they are the most successful like LA they are the ones to be punished , not sure it gels my friend . Also without the performance enhancing drugs & all the other illegal activites going on in the sport LA was fundamentally the best cyclist on the Tour at that time . Not sure that is something that can be said of City & the PL . Sadly LA & his arrogance , denial & refusal to accept his punishment finished him .There i will 100% go along with you because i feel City & their counter claim could well be an act of hubris on their part & be as much of a disaster as LA's attempts to hold on to his place as # 1 cyclist . I was a big fan of LA & while i will never disrespect his victory over cancer & the huge sums of money his foundation raised i , now i uuuuugh .. words i wanna type would get my comment deleted !! It will be very interesting to see what comes next in the City saga but until a legal judgement is handed down i will continue to say they are not guilty , regardless of what my gut might say or what i think is the truth . Sorry for the length of comment & i hope you see no malice is meant . 🙏🏻✌🏻
Gab and many others misunderstand, In business world City owners payment for inflated commercial deals, would be considered a subsidize and in most instances illegal. Only in autocracies is this kind of business ok.
Technically it does as it also is where city fudged sponsorship data . So they could argue if these are unfair then so are those .. Going back to the original APT in 2021 they are saying APT which is to have deals that are from sponsorships owned by club owners checked by an independent auditor to determine fare market value . Which does go back to 2021. Only reason city are moaning is because they’ve been caught breaking the rules
Gab makes a brilliant point and that is that in the PL rules about majority voting, there are no safeguards for those who do not agree or are disadvantaged as there are in other walks of democracy e.g when the Tories are in power, labour supporters are still looked after. However, both of them are deluded about the 115 charges being affected. The monday hearing is about the straw which broke the camel's back which is the change of APT rules in February 2024. The 115 allegations are from 2009 to 2018. One is about declared payments, the other about disguised sponsorship. City have to play in the PL. there is no choice in England. Finally, Jules is out of his depth.
But there are tonnes of rules in football which violate UK law. For example transfer windows violate employment law by saying you can only move employers during the summer and January.
Not true, the transfer window isn’t a transfer window. It’s a registration window. You can agree transfers all year all you like, you just can’t register the transfers/players for the new club
I've never heard such nonsense as what Gab said about City won't be "wasting money" etc... They will literally buy ANY player they want at whatever price is given. You are completely delusional if you think they won't be using this advantage to out bid anyone trying to buy top players that City is interested in. You live on a very strange planet if you think they won't completly abuse this rule if it's changed
I think he expects UAE to cool off their investments in City now that they “built something” which is a pretty big assumption and hasn’t happened outside of maybe Wolfsburg and Monaco. But the only way City’s owners stop spending is if they plan on selling which might only happen if they get found guilty
Look @ the buyout clauses implemented to attract top players to the Premier League or within the Premier League. The League often touted as the best league in the world, certainly requires reforms to ensure long-term sustainability and competitive balance.
I understand what you two are trying to do presenting arguments for both sides. The problem I have with it is that city group's position is indefensible. Citigroups response to the allegations confirms that. They don't have counterarguments to disprove the charges against them. In response they play the victim. Audaciously saying that they have been discriminated against. Discriminated and victimized is laughable. They have done irreparable damage to the Premier League UEFA global football as a whole and most importantly to the supporters of every team, even their own. I think it is highly suspicious that 48 hours after this new reports of the 115 charges. You have managers and players coincidentally being linked with moves away from Man City. If I was guardiola or a player at Man City and I read in the papers the response citigroup made to the allegations playing the victim card. I would be sick to my stomach and I'd want to leave too. In the previous UEFA case their fate was decided by a three judge panel. Two out of the three judges off that panel were appointed by city. Let's play the factor in the chargers being dropped. There were no cries of tyranny by the majority then. Funny how that works
yes they do have a counter arguements, the whole premier league club base should support City, how do you attract foreign investment without freedom to attract sponcers, Newcastle are the richest club in the world but are thinking about selling players this summer to balance the books and thats wrong, as for things like undermining the league, absolute twoddle, they said that about sky sponcership in 1991 and most of those same people made a lot of money out of sky, so lets try and cut thru team bias and look at the facts.
@petuser1 investment always welcome but abide by the rules of the organisation you've bought into. The tail doesn't wag the dog. City have clearly cheated the system and now throwing their toys out of their pram.. pathetic.
Historically the people with the most wealth are always more cautious with finances , regardless of the business they are in . To these people throwing money away is not part of their plan . They may have unlimited money but they always want more !
@@spuderdogegamer3886learn to read properly before typing .. the term historically is used in my comment to highlight the fact that throughout history people with vast wealth were & still are more inclined to keep / protect their assets .. i.e . money . It actually has nothing to do with the City case . Rich people across the centuries are more adverse to wasting money .. they squirrel it away , they use every method available to pay as little tax as possible , ( tax evasion , ever heard of it ) they are also prone to pay staff much lower wages . They do not want to spend money , they just want to keep as much of it as possible & keep aquiring more & more with the least possible risk !!! Jeepers creepers , try to comprehend someones point before typing a stupid reply . You just make yourself look foolish .
@@spuderdogegamer3886oh dear ! my comment & the use of the word historically appear to be beyond your comprehension . IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CASE INVOLVING CITY , rather I was refuting the original comment by highllighting the fact that throghout the last 2000 odd years of civilisation those who have amassed vast sums of money are the most likely to be risk adverse . They want to keep what they have & grab more & more with the least amount of financial risk to themselves . It is kind of obvious if you have even a basic level of education or intelligence that this was the intention of my comment & my use of the word historically . 🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️ i am sorry you were unable to grasp this concept but i hope i have clarified the point ... ffs !!!
This isn't how sports washing is supposed to work. This isn't good for reputation. Who wants to go into business with someone who won't work to the agreed framework?
If City wins or nullifies the related parties rule, then the existing 115 financial charges are directly undermined. Clever by City and will have a number of teams supporting them.
There are a couple significant logical fallacies in Gab’s discussion of this topic, the most significant being: Etihad’s inflated sponsorship deal doesn’t solely represent an outsized loss for Etihad and an outsized investment in the premier league by City, as Gab suggests. The Premier Leagues accusation (supported by leaked communication as shown by Bild) is that THE MONEY NEVER CHANGED HANDS. City “booked” $80M in revenue but only $8M in cash transferred between the two entities and the remainder was “accounted for elsewhere”. When the Premier League asked City and Etihad to produce records displaying the “elsewhere” City and Etihad did not cooperate. If this is accurate, then that is fraudulent accounting - they “invented” fake revenue to allow for bigger spend. Further, it is important to note that in accounting and tax law, “related party transactions” (such as entities with common ownership like Etihad and City) ALWAYS receive close scrutiny by legal and tax authorities because of their HIGH POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE. These things are handled with scrutiny and additional oversight by every tax authority in the western world, including the UK, so the argument put forward in City’s lawsuit that constraints surrounding related party transactions are discriminatory and unlawful is ridiculous.
@@Cyrus-rodn45all due respect friend, but the CAS ruling didn’t prove anything - it merely overturned UEFA’s ruling on technicalities (namely, disallowing the emails on account of being “time barred” meaning the emails that were produced fell outside the five year window of consideration.) It’s also worth noting that the CAS panel was comprised of three arbitrators - one of which was chosen by city as is customary, one of which was chosen by UEFA as is customary, and one of which was recommended by city which is highly irregular. The third should be chosen by an independent body, and you can see how accepting a recommendation for who the deciding vote would be from one of the parties in the dispute could be seen as exerting bias on the process. That third arbitrator should have been entirely independently selected, and entirely independent in nature. But whatever, people will believe whatever they want to believe regarding this situation. Facts no longer matter it seems, only narrative.
A lot of people have very short memorries in the comments . It wasn't that long ago the " big 6 " were prepared to walk away from the EPL & join a super league . Remember when all the fans came together & the clubs stopped . Strange that nobody mentions that Ratty Ratcliffe has stated this remains his number 1 ambition . Accusing City of destroying the EPL because of legal actions is one thing but don't stay quiet on the thing which would acutally hurt the EPL more .. if United did leave you can bet others would follow & that will be the EPL finished . It is obvious all the top clubs are greedy & want more & more . Is City going to court right or wrong i have no idea i am not a legal expert , but as i look at the future of the EPL as a whole it is more obvious that people like Ratcliffe & Ineos clearly do not care or see the PL as their best option . They would leave tomorrow if the new super league propsals were advantagious to their club . Don't lose sight that the super league is still a very real project for the top european clubs . Stop being hypocrites .. blame all or none for the mess & possible ruin of top flight English football
I’m a Liverpool fan and we played Leeds Utd on the Monday night, one day after the super league was announced and I couldn’t bring myself around to cheer when Liverpool scored as I was totally against super league and cared more about the English football pyramid…I’m totally against Man City and what they’re looking to do in suing the PL and basically wanting to change rules as they don’t like them and it could have major repercussions for English football first and if they win this case then maybe UEFA’s FFP is next for them, it’s like society where the rich get richer and the middle/lower class stays the same, I’d rather a more level playing field and I’d be against Liverpool being taking over by a state ownership
We have no idea who leaked this one. The PL wanted and have got support from a number of other clubs and so they must have told them about it weeks ago and supplied them with City's case. And also City are supported by at least one club. So there are potentially 21 sources for this leak.
Gab is talking nonsense, of course they want to drive home their advantage if they don’t then why sue. The best form of defence is attack, that’s the tactic they are using.
A lot of people aren’t really digging into the specifics of the charges. One of them even includes them breaking contract law to get Pep from Bayern. Relegation and stripping titles wouldn’t be a proper punishment. Owners have to be forced to sell or else have the club expelled imo
Good job by Gab; one of the most reasonable assessments of the situation I’ve listened to. No histrionics or hyperbole - just facts and well thought out opinions . The one element missing imo was the need for EPL to balance run away spending with preventing clubs from investing in their brand which protects (either purposefully or as an unintended consequence) the ‘cartel’ clubs at the top.
This explanation isn't correct(Gab almost got there in the end but too little too late). This wont get rid of PSR, this wont even get rid of the APT regulations introduced in 2021. It is about specific changes that City objected to the same day they were voted in during FEBRUARY 2024. On the basis that they were not lawful. The athletic claimed it was City in the same week that news broke in Feb. This is simply the hearing for that objection and it's nothing groundbreaking. Rule changes happen a lot and it's highly probable it's not the first time someone has objected and/or questioned the legality of certain changes. We just don't normally hear about it because it isn't really a big deal. IF it's unlawful it SHOULDN'T be in the rule set and the PL will have to make amendments. Nobody can argue otherwise. If it's not contravening any laws, then the rule changes will stay. It's nothing to do with the 115 charges. That accusation(and the image rights and manager payments accusations which are separate from the main charge) would land City in trouble in ANY era, even before FFP. False accounting, fraud would break rules and in fact be illegal(though they haven't used that word because only the courts could decide that, this is just arbitration) in any business sector too.
The Premier League has experienced substantial growth over the past five decades with the introduction of various technologies economic developments, and changes to rules and policies. It is crucial to consult and implement any changes that promote economic GDP growth in the UK and adhere to the law of any business. In my opinion for the Premier League to advance to the next era of football, specific modifications are necessary in terms of business and next-generation growth. Therefore I will be endorsing City in this matter. Manchester City in particular has managed its business in an incredible way contributing to economic growth and future development. Unlike other football clubs that are not sustainably run, Manchester City is a phenomenally managed business. In all businesses rules should be adapted to benefit and support everyone in the industry, ensuring a level playing field.
FFP kicking in- Arsenal Liverpool Aston Villa etc now at least have a fair chance. If Man City are guilty then the titles the won should be given to the runners-up in all competitions plus points deductions and relegation. Would you go to City now with all those charges coming in the Autumn.
The issue with “the man city leadership leaving bcs i dont see them willing to spend more etx etx” Is that, they literally do not have a limit. Its an INSANELY wealthy ownership. Its not a “businessman” running a club or something. Its an entire kingdom
Hi Gabs & Juls, Man City is part of the Premier League so they are actually taking legal action against themselves as well, Regards Brian Hammond Cape Town South Africa
@@theone4808made back door deal with the Spanish government to get cheap land and to be taxed as a charity. This helped them make money fraudulently. Madrid are the cheats.
Premier League clubs are no longer competitive with just millionaire owners. Today, clubs are funded by billionaire owners, changing the landscape. In the future, trillionaire owners may create a new level playing field in the Premier League. This is the reality of the industry, football is not changing it has changed long long time ago and now it's been reformed.
Arab or American owners pick one. Eurodorks will pick Arabs out of sexual jealousy over how much European chicks like American dudes and the results will be on them.
Etihad airline are re structioring after their many years of lost....they cannot pay that price u r talki g about any way...theybwilk be on ipo soon Eittihad
nothing funny about your comment. you are just talking trash and hurting inside because man city winning trophies and your club struggling. the only nonsense you can say is 115.
August 1998 Man City were 14th in league one .. the 58th ranked team in all leagues .. average home crowd of almost 28 ,500 a record in that division . City have always had a fanbase that has stood by the club even at their lowest point .15 fans ?? 😂 Ask anyone who supports Macclesfield , Gillingham , Walsall or the other teams who city played during those times what the crowd sizes & atmosphere were like when they played City . Actually do some research before you start yapping ya numpty !!!
@@TheDude3007-dd7fg they are just being salty and feel hurt in their hearts. is pure jealousy. most these idiots the clubs they are supporting are struggling and they feel hurt to see city over taking them. they have nothing to say than same nonsense claiming city don’t have fans or the nonsense 115.
@@jameselliot2611Its the same with the b.s. about City spending more than everyone else when Chelsea , United , Arsenal , Spurs & Newcastle have higher net expenditure . City are ranked 6th !! The lengths people go to when trying to find ways to hate is embarrassing sometimes . Jealousy is a sad thing . Its the same when they tie Pep to the "115" charges which are from Mancinis time at the club . I have no idea if they are guilty or not , i am not a lawyer or financial expert & have no idea what evidence the powers that be have but i believe you are innocent until legally proven otherwise . If they are guilty so be it . City have been in worse situations , like 1998 & i bet that if the worst happens the fans will still be there . 👍🏻✌🏻
God I absolutely hate this channel. Its been noticeable how ESPN FC have limited commentary on Man City lawsuit against the Premier League. So when you have Gab & Jules (who along with Craig Burley are the people I like on this godforsaken channel) having to talk round in circles its annoying. When the trash Talksport are more willing to go into depths regarding this issue (Talksport is trash) then this says all about ESPN FC. My personal opinion is that Man City on course of destroying English football with this lawsuit. The nonsensical argument of "Tyranny of the majority" and playing the race card claiming discrimination is pathetic. If the 115 charges weren't brought against Man City, would they still acting like the victim? The fact of the matter they are not the victim when they are part of the elite and this lawsuit pretty much indicates that they know that don't have an answer for the 115 charges levelled against them.
You mean like when all of the so called big six were ready & very willing to walk away from the EPL & destroy it a couple of years back ? And remember Ratcliffe has stated that is still very much his end goal with United !!
@dstewusa7054 well Etihad moving forward with getting an ipo to go public on the stock market is a good start...along with cas already proving and saying in their document that citys deal with Etihad was "fair" and they are not "related parties" but I guess facts aren't your strong suit.
Doesn't this just prove that they knew they were breaking the rules all along? Their location of origin has absolutely nothing to do with this. It's not about where the money is coming from, it's about financially cheating to gain a sporting advantage. Without the money from winning completions and the phoney sponsorship deals, they barely make enough money to pay the car park attendants, never mind transfer fees and pep and the players wages.
City a club that out spent any team can pay any wage can sign out bid anyone and have been doing so for years… yeah the rule have been unfair to them they have been discriminated against and have been at a disadvantage compared to other club… give me a fucking break
You mean the club that is ranked sixth in expenditure behind Chelsea , United , Arsenal , Spurs & Newcastle ?? That City ?? Maybe do a little reasearch before commenting next time 👍🏻 ( friendly advice , no hate 🤝🏻✌🏻 )
PL needs more American ownership who is used to operating at a high level of sporting sophistication. City ownership running circles around snaggletooth British owners who aren’t smart enough to keep up.
There are only two EPL clubs without foreign investment .. Brentford & Brighton . Every other club has partial or complete ownership by overseas parties .
city have turned Prem into La Liga ...when was the last time that league was won by someone other than real or Barca ...boring .what is anti-competitive is for City to buy up 100 million players from clubs and sit them on the bench
@@Rageebait Not quite, it found City not guilty of the charges they considered, some were timebarred and not consider but where they stated it had found not enough evidence for UEFAs claims. They did however found City guilty of not cooperating and gave them a €10m fine, and you'd expect that would be how this 115 charges case ends up as well. Not enough evidence, a fine for lack of cooperation. The recent case they are discussing in this video however has nothing to do with the 115 charges, this is about the changes in the finance rules, and specificially the updates made in February which City now has filed a case against (and is said to get backing from Newcastle, Chelsea, Everton and Villa)
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
Far out Gab went into deep water quick with his heterosexual example 😂
Fair market value rules are just accepted cheating. Your sponsors should not be linked to the owners, at all.
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
These 2 can’t explain anything legal.
“I don’t think city will abuse this even if they win” 🙄🙄🙄 GMAFB. You think they’re gonna be like oh well thanks for the win, we’ll still be getting 20m for the shirts. How naive is this guy? They literally said they will have to “stop investing in the community and women’s team” because of it like some sort of threat.
Why are clubs not abusing it before 2021? People really have no clue about what City is doing
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
They cheated for 15 years .Hope every single club they affected sues them for the prize money they would have received
Don’t talk about things you clearly know nothing about
@@environm3ntalist549he obviously does as you needed to comment 😂
City are blatant cheats.
Utter nonsense
Citys original sponsorship deal was 400mil for 10 years vs Arsenals 90mil for 15 years, CIty had at best a tenth of AFC fanbase and global pull so its simple math
Sounds like arsenal's problem
@@Sam-nn9ms As if AFC front office would ve accepted less than market value, clown
They absolutely will spend nonsensical amounts of money
the Lance Armstrong of football. They will always have an asterisk and if they aren't stripped of their ill gotten trophies, asterisks need to be official.
I get why you are trying to connect the two & it is an interesting comparison but i'm not sure it works . LA was the poster boy of cycling , his story , recovering from cancer etc was inspirational but when caught doping he was rightly scorned , his legacy was tainted & he was correctly stripped of his titles .The problem is everyone in cycling was doping at that time .. he just did it better than everyone else and that is where i believe your analogy dosen't quite work as it would mean that all Pl clubs are " financially doping " City have just been doing it better than all the rest & because they are the most successful like LA they are the ones to be punished , not sure it gels my friend . Also without the performance enhancing drugs & all the other illegal activites going on in the sport LA was fundamentally the best cyclist on the Tour at that time . Not sure that is something that can be said of City & the PL . Sadly LA & his arrogance , denial & refusal to accept his punishment finished him .There i will 100% go along with you because i feel City & their counter claim could well be an act of hubris on their part & be as much of a disaster as LA's attempts to hold on to his place as # 1 cyclist . I was a big fan of LA & while i will never disrespect his victory over cancer & the huge sums of money his foundation raised i , now i uuuuugh .. words i wanna type would get my comment deleted !! It will be very interesting to see what comes next in the City saga but until a legal judgement is handed down i will continue to say they are not guilty , regardless of what my gut might say or what i think is the truth . Sorry for the length of comment & i hope you see no malice is meant . 🙏🏻✌🏻
Gab and many others misunderstand, In business world City owners payment for inflated commercial deals, would be considered a subsidize and in most instances illegal. Only in autocracies is this kind of business ok.
It is not illegal though.
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
@@duran9664 that dont make no sense
This is about the last change to APT rules in February, not APT itself (which came in back in 2021).
Has no connection to 115 charges.
Sure does, its what one of the 115 is about.
Technically it does as it also is where city fudged sponsorship data . So they could argue if these are unfair then so are those ..
Going back to the original APT in 2021 they are saying APT which is to have deals that are from sponsorships owned by club owners checked by an independent auditor to determine fare market value .
Which does go back to 2021. Only reason city are moaning is because they’ve been caught breaking the rules
Gab makes a brilliant point and that is that in the PL rules about majority voting, there are no safeguards for those who do not agree or are disadvantaged as there are in other walks of democracy e.g when the Tories are in power, labour supporters are still looked after. However, both of them are deluded about the 115 charges being affected. The monday hearing is about the straw which broke the camel's back which is the change of APT rules in February 2024. The 115 allegations are from 2009 to 2018. One is about declared payments, the other about disguised sponsorship. City have to play in the PL. there is no choice in England. Finally, Jules is out of his depth.
But there are tonnes of rules in football which violate UK law. For example transfer windows violate employment law by saying you can only move employers during the summer and January.
Not true, the transfer window isn’t a transfer window. It’s a registration window. You can agree transfers all year all you like, you just can’t register the transfers/players for the new club
@danielberry4765. Same thing different name.
@@Maax1200
No it’s not.
One is transfer
One is registration
Gab! Thanks for being impartial and thinking it through in a way most people aren't. I appreciate that nuance
Why put PG ' s photo in the thumbnail , i am pretty sure the charges are related to former manager Roberto Mancini & his time at the club .
one of many.....
I've never heard such nonsense as what Gab said about City won't be "wasting money" etc... They will literally buy ANY player they want at whatever price is given. You are completely delusional if you think they won't be using this advantage to out bid anyone trying to buy top players that City is interested in. You live on a very strange planet if you think they won't completly abuse this rule if it's changed
I think he expects UAE to cool off their investments in City now that they “built something” which is a pretty big assumption and hasn’t happened outside of maybe Wolfsburg and Monaco. But the only way City’s owners stop spending is if they plan on selling which might only happen if they get found guilty
They can do that anyway. People should just admit they don't understand what's happening. 😄
I think they won't because of PR, they've arguing all this time the fairness of what they earned, priced and spend has been in fair terms
@@drdasslerLike you admitting you don't know about this
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
Look @ the buyout clauses implemented to attract top players to the Premier League or within the Premier League. The League often touted as the best league in the world, certainly requires reforms to ensure long-term sustainability and competitive balance.
Great breakdown, this is what true news looks like
They are talking nonsense for the majority of this
I understand what you two are trying to do presenting arguments for both sides. The problem I have with it is that city group's position is indefensible. Citigroups response to the allegations confirms that. They don't have counterarguments to disprove the charges against them. In response they play the victim. Audaciously saying that they have been discriminated against. Discriminated and victimized is laughable. They have done irreparable damage to the Premier League UEFA global football as a whole and most importantly to the supporters of every team, even their own. I think it is highly suspicious that 48 hours after this new reports of the 115 charges. You have managers and players coincidentally being linked with moves away from Man City. If I was guardiola or a player at Man City and I read in the papers the response citigroup made to the allegations playing the victim card. I would be sick to my stomach and I'd want to leave too. In the previous UEFA case their fate was decided by a three judge panel. Two out of the three judges off that panel were appointed by city. Let's play the factor in the chargers being dropped. There were no cries of tyranny by the majority then. Funny how that works
They're different issues. 🤡
@@drdasslerIt isn't clown
yes they do have a counter arguements, the whole premier league club base should support City, how do you attract foreign investment without freedom to attract sponcers, Newcastle are the richest club in the world but are thinking about selling players this summer to balance the books and thats wrong, as for things like undermining the league, absolute twoddle, they said that about sky sponcership in 1991 and most of those same people made a lot of money out of sky, so lets try and cut thru team bias and look at the facts.
@petuser1 investment always welcome but abide by the rules of the organisation you've bought into.
The tail doesn't wag the dog.
City have clearly cheated the system and now throwing their toys out of their pram.. pathetic.
Don’t understand how Gab doesn’t understand that the people he says “don’t want to waste money” have unlimited money.
👇👇👇 City Case in nutshell 👇👇👇
😡 Stop discriminating against corrupt rich people & royal mafias 😡
Historically the people with the most wealth are always more cautious with finances , regardless of the business they are in . To these people throwing money away is not part of their plan . They may have unlimited money but they always want more !
@TheDude3007-dd7fg but this isn't historical wealth ffs
@@spuderdogegamer3886learn to read properly before typing .. the term historically is used in my comment to highlight the fact that throughout history people with vast wealth were & still are more inclined to keep / protect their assets .. i.e . money . It actually has nothing to do with the City case . Rich people across the centuries are more adverse to wasting money .. they squirrel it away , they use every method available to pay as little tax as possible , ( tax evasion , ever heard of it ) they are also prone to pay staff much lower wages . They do not want to spend money , they just want to keep as much of it as possible & keep aquiring more & more with the least possible risk !!! Jeepers creepers , try to comprehend someones point before typing a stupid reply . You just make yourself look foolish .
@@spuderdogegamer3886oh dear ! my comment & the use of the word historically appear to be beyond your comprehension . IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CASE INVOLVING CITY , rather I was refuting the original comment by highllighting the fact that throghout the last 2000 odd years of civilisation those who have amassed vast sums of money are the most likely to be risk adverse . They want to keep what they have & grab more & more with the least amount of financial risk to themselves . It is kind of obvious if you have even a basic level of education or intelligence that this was the intention of my comment & my use of the word historically . 🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️🤦🏼♂️ i am sorry you were unable to grasp this concept but i hope i have clarified the point ... ffs !!!
I think all the others should pull out of the premier league or have city removed from the premier league.
What else don't you have a clue about? 😄
@drdassler Atleast he knows more than you
This isn't how sports washing is supposed to work.
This isn't good for reputation.
Who wants to go into business with someone who won't work to the agreed framework?
These two are talking like they don't know what's happening. City's action is separate from the unfounded allegations. Get a clue people.
Oh yes, this random person knows more than people who's job is to get info about this.
All you know is what you found on Internet or biased interest
If City wins or nullifies the related parties rule, then the existing 115 financial charges are directly undermined.
Clever by City and will have a number of teams supporting them.
Jesus Christ did you watch the video at all?
The best analysis and commentary I’ve heard on this case compared to the English pundits view of this.
There are a couple significant logical fallacies in Gab’s discussion of this topic, the most significant being: Etihad’s inflated sponsorship deal doesn’t solely represent an outsized loss for Etihad and an outsized investment in the premier league by City, as Gab suggests. The Premier Leagues accusation (supported by leaked communication as shown by Bild) is that THE MONEY NEVER CHANGED HANDS. City “booked” $80M in revenue but only $8M in cash transferred between the two entities and the remainder was “accounted for elsewhere”. When the Premier League asked City and Etihad to produce records displaying the “elsewhere” City and Etihad did not cooperate. If this is accurate, then that is fraudulent accounting - they “invented” fake revenue to allow for bigger spend.
Further, it is important to note that in accounting and tax law, “related party transactions” (such as entities with common ownership like Etihad and City) ALWAYS receive close scrutiny by legal and tax authorities because of their HIGH POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE. These things are handled with scrutiny and additional oversight by every tax authority in the western world, including the UK, so the argument put forward in City’s lawsuit that constraints surrounding related party transactions are discriminatory and unlawful is ridiculous.
False, that proven fake by cas,
@@Cyrus-rodn45all due respect friend, but the CAS ruling didn’t prove anything - it merely overturned UEFA’s ruling on technicalities (namely, disallowing the emails on account of being “time barred” meaning the emails that were produced fell outside the five year window of consideration.)
It’s also worth noting that the CAS panel was comprised of three arbitrators - one of which was chosen by city as is customary, one of which was chosen by UEFA as is customary, and one of which was recommended by city which is highly irregular. The third should be chosen by an independent body, and you can see how accepting a recommendation for who the deciding vote would be from one of the parties in the dispute could be seen as exerting bias on the process. That third arbitrator should have been entirely independently selected, and entirely independent in nature.
But whatever, people will believe whatever they want to believe regarding this situation. Facts no longer matter it seems, only narrative.
@@turunturun no it proved uefa case was flawed
A lot of people have very short memorries in the comments . It wasn't that long ago the " big 6 " were prepared to walk away from the EPL & join a super league . Remember when all the fans came together & the clubs stopped . Strange that nobody mentions that Ratty Ratcliffe has stated this remains his number 1 ambition . Accusing City of destroying the EPL because of legal actions is one thing but don't stay quiet on the thing which would acutally hurt the EPL more .. if United did leave you can bet others would follow & that will be the EPL finished . It is obvious all the top clubs are greedy & want more & more . Is City going to court right or wrong i have no idea i am not a legal expert , but as i look at the future of the EPL as a whole it is more obvious that people like Ratcliffe & Ineos clearly do not care or see the PL as their best option . They would leave tomorrow if the new super league propsals were advantagious to their club . Don't lose sight that the super league is still a very real project for the top european clubs . Stop being hypocrites .. blame all or none for the mess & possible ruin of top flight English football
I’m a Liverpool fan and we played Leeds Utd on the Monday night, one day after the super league was announced and I couldn’t bring myself around to cheer when Liverpool scored as I was totally against super league and cared more about the English football pyramid…I’m totally against Man City and what they’re looking to do in suing the PL and basically wanting to change rules as they don’t like them and it could have major repercussions for English football first and if they win this case then maybe UEFA’s FFP is next for them, it’s like society where the rich get richer and the middle/lower class stays the same, I’d rather a more level playing field and I’d be against Liverpool being taking over by a state ownership
Is this a straight win or lose thing or can the arbiters make the PL change some of it ????
We have no idea who leaked this one. The PL wanted and have got support from a number of other clubs and so they must have told them about it weeks ago and supplied them with City's case. And also City are supported by at least one club. So there are potentially 21 sources for this leak.
Gab is talking nonsense, of course they want to drive home their advantage if they don’t then why sue. The best form of defence is attack, that’s the tactic they are using.
The best form of defense is definitely not attack in the legal system. Especially Englands legal system. Stick to Ghanan legal analysis.
A lot of people aren’t really digging into the specifics of the charges. One of them even includes them breaking contract law to get Pep from Bayern. Relegation and stripping titles wouldn’t be a proper punishment. Owners have to be forced to sell or else have the club expelled imo
Not sports washing, image washing is a more appropriate term
Excellent analysis.
Good job by Gab; one of the most reasonable assessments of the situation I’ve listened to. No histrionics or hyperbole - just facts and well thought out opinions . The one element missing imo was the need for EPL to balance run away spending with preventing clubs from investing in their brand which protects (either purposefully or as an unintended consequence) the ‘cartel’ clubs at the top.
Airline is owned by city owners so would just use there own money to pay for the sponsor which is the whole point of this argument
This explanation isn't correct(Gab almost got there in the end but too little too late). This wont get rid of PSR, this wont even get rid of the APT regulations introduced in 2021. It is about specific changes that City objected to the same day they were voted in during FEBRUARY 2024. On the basis that they were not lawful. The athletic claimed it was City in the same week that news broke in Feb. This is simply the hearing for that objection and it's nothing groundbreaking. Rule changes happen a lot and it's highly probable it's not the first time someone has objected and/or questioned the legality of certain changes. We just don't normally hear about it because it isn't really a big deal. IF it's unlawful it SHOULDN'T be in the rule set and the PL will have to make amendments. Nobody can argue otherwise. If it's not contravening any laws, then the rule changes will stay. It's nothing to do with the 115 charges. That accusation(and the image rights and manager payments accusations which are separate from the main charge) would land City in trouble in ANY era, even before FFP. False accounting, fraud would break rules and in fact be illegal(though they haven't used that word because only the courts could decide that, this is just arbitration) in any business sector too.
Where are city hiding all the legal fee costs on there accounts with 5k p/hr KCs 😅
The Premier League has experienced substantial growth over the past five decades with the introduction of various technologies economic developments, and changes to rules and policies. It is crucial to consult and implement any changes that promote economic GDP growth in the UK and adhere to the law of any business. In my opinion for the Premier League to advance to the next era of football, specific modifications are necessary in terms of business and next-generation growth. Therefore I will be endorsing City in this matter. Manchester City in particular has managed its business in an incredible way contributing to economic growth and future development. Unlike other football clubs that are not sustainably run, Manchester City is a phenomenally managed business. In all businesses rules should be adapted to benefit and support everyone in the industry, ensuring a level playing field.
City couldn't do any of that without cooking the books.
What nonsense saying the owner and chairman aren’t football fans your clueless
Get a sports lawyer and an accountant ….it will help you guys
I wonder how much city are paying for this
FFP kicking in- Arsenal Liverpool Aston Villa etc now at least have a fair chance. If Man City are guilty then the titles the won should be given to the runners-up in all competitions plus points deductions and relegation. Would you go to City now with all those charges coming in the Autumn.
The issue with
“the man city leadership leaving bcs i dont see them willing to spend more etx etx”
Is that, they literally do not have a limit.
Its an INSANELY wealthy ownership. Its not a “businessman” running a club or something.
Its an entire kingdom
Mr Marcotti is talking absolute nonsense.
🚨Someone paid somthing to Gab in AbuDahbi 😒
Abudabi can sponsor to pgmol some more years
Remember the PL get there money from the clubs so City are paying the premier leagues legal fees
Hi Gabs & Juls, Man City is part of the Premier League so they are actually taking legal action against themselves as well, Regards Brian Hammond Cape Town South Africa
so we get a Real Madrid fan and a PSG fan specualting on ATP,,, this is like Turkeys voting for xmas,, City are ony doing what RM and PSG are doing
What rules did Real Madrid break?
@petuser1
Stop spouting ill-informed Whataboutery
@@theone4808made back door deal with the Spanish government to get cheap land and to be taxed as a charity. This helped them make money fraudulently. Madrid are the cheats.
Money talks unfortunately city bet Uefa once if they beat the Premier league they'll go straight to CAS and beat Uefa again
If City win Newcastle will go out and spend 750 million because they are not in Europe and don’t have to adhere to UEFA FFP
Jesus this guy need to stop making theoretical examples 😂😂
Gabs is waffling a lot here. He’s better when talking about football than finance.
Man City will sue UEFA next if they can’t play Champions League
Man city just want to cheat in peace. Leave them alone....city couldn't win anything without sugar daddy lottery 😂
Premier League clubs are no longer competitive with just millionaire owners. Today, clubs are funded by billionaire owners, changing the landscape. In the future, trillionaire owners may create a new level playing field in the Premier League. This is the reality of the industry, football is not changing it has changed long long time ago and now it's been reformed.
Arab or American owners pick one. Eurodorks will pick Arabs out of sexual jealousy over how much European chicks like American dudes and the results will be on them.
Dirtihad😡😡😡
I think city should just leave EPL, clearly they dont want u there...just go join the super league. You've already broken all sorts of EPL records! 😅
Etihad airline are re structioring after their many years of lost....they cannot pay that price u r talki g about any way...theybwilk be on ipo soon Eittihad
If they win against the prem what's to stop them bringing the same case against ufea we all know they cheated to the top
If city lose the super league won’t be far away
Manchester City have my unconditional support
that's why guardiola will leave after next season because he knows everything is over
Whatever man City will win❤
@@AnissaaliAnissaCheats never win.
City have always been one step ahead and anybody that believes they aren't this time are deluded
Peps always been a step ahead. That's why he's jumping ship.
@lilbaz8073
😂😂😂😂
ESPN not addressing this on ESPN FC and palming it off to these bobbleheads reeks!
This is ESPN fc’s centerpiece show silly goose.
@@dannytallmage2971But not the main one silly potato
@@Rageebait it literally is that is what centerpiece means.
@@dannytallmage2971 It really isn't. It's Fathead's podcast with Jules unable to get word in edgeways. This is a podcast.
@@alastairhimmer1916 ESPN fc is a podcast network lol. You think this makes it to tv in the United States?
Are they going to give the title to 2nd place team then?
Man City and their 15 fans 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Pep Guardiola is running cos he knows what’s coming.
Laugh at your own stupidity
nothing funny about your comment. you are just talking trash and hurting inside because man city winning trophies and your club struggling. the only nonsense you can say is 115.
August 1998 Man City were 14th in league one .. the 58th ranked team in all leagues .. average home crowd of almost 28 ,500 a record in that division . City have always had a fanbase that has stood by the club even at their lowest point .15 fans ?? 😂 Ask anyone who supports Macclesfield , Gillingham , Walsall or the other teams who city played during those times what the crowd sizes & atmosphere were like when they played City . Actually do some research before you start yapping ya numpty !!!
@@TheDude3007-dd7fg they are just being salty and feel hurt in their hearts. is pure jealousy. most these idiots the clubs they are supporting are struggling and they feel hurt to see city over taking them. they have nothing to say than same nonsense claiming city don’t have fans or the nonsense 115.
@@jameselliot2611Its the same with the b.s. about City spending more than everyone else when Chelsea , United , Arsenal , Spurs & Newcastle have higher net expenditure . City are ranked 6th !! The lengths people go to when trying to find ways to hate is embarrassing sometimes . Jealousy is a sad thing . Its the same when they tie Pep to the "115" charges which are from Mancinis time at the club . I have no idea if they are guilty or not , i am not a lawyer or financial expert & have no idea what evidence the powers that be have but i believe you are innocent until legally proven otherwise . If they are guilty so be it . City have been in worse situations , like 1998 & i bet that if the worst happens the fans will still be there . 👍🏻✌🏻
God I absolutely hate this channel. Its been noticeable how ESPN FC have limited commentary on Man City lawsuit against the Premier League. So when you have Gab & Jules (who along with Craig Burley are the people I like on this godforsaken channel) having to talk round in circles its annoying. When the trash Talksport are more willing to go into depths regarding this issue (Talksport is trash) then this says all about ESPN FC.
My personal opinion is that Man City on course of destroying English football with this lawsuit. The nonsensical argument of "Tyranny of the majority" and playing the race card claiming discrimination is pathetic. If the 115 charges weren't brought against Man City, would they still acting like the victim? The fact of the matter they are not the victim when they are part of the elite and this lawsuit pretty much indicates that they know that don't have an answer for the 115 charges levelled against them.
You mean like when all of the so called big six were ready & very willing to walk away from the EPL & destroy it a couple of years back ? And remember Ratcliffe has stated that is still very much his end goal with United !!
Man cheating 115 fc
▪︎PL - announce Charges/Accusations everytime City win Title
▪︎City - Enough.Prove it or pay damages
▪︎Media - how dare City clap back?😂
City have had years to prove they are innocent. "They shouldnt have to" doesnt hold water.
@HumanBeingsRThinkingBeings
We’re all still waiting for the Irrefutable Evidence, Pal
@dstewusa7054 well Etihad moving forward with getting an ipo to go public on the stock market is a good start...along with cas already proving and saying in their document that citys deal with Etihad was "fair" and they are not "related parties" but I guess facts aren't your strong suit.
@@Maax1200it is up to the accuser to bring the case forward & present their evidence .. that is how law works !!
@@TheDude3007-dd7fg PL already did that, now its up tp City to prove them wrong.
super league on way
farmers league
ban them forever cheating dirt
This is a desperate lawsuit because City know they’re going to lose.
Stick to your American sports
Who is the most talked about football club in the world?
man city
Man cheaty
Pep Guardiola leaving Fraud FC is no surprise. Think most people would run away from that mess.
Doesn't this just prove that they knew they were breaking the rules all along?
Their location of origin has absolutely nothing to do with this.
It's not about where the money is coming from, it's about financially cheating to gain a sporting advantage.
Without the money from winning completions and the phoney sponsorship deals, they barely make enough money to pay the car park attendants, never mind transfer fees and pep and the players wages.
City a club that out spent any team can pay any wage can sign out bid anyone and have been doing so for years… yeah the rule have been unfair to them they have been discriminated against and have been at a disadvantage compared to other club… give me a fucking break
You mean the club that is ranked sixth in expenditure behind Chelsea , United , Arsenal , Spurs & Newcastle ?? That City ?? Maybe do a little reasearch before commenting next time 👍🏻 ( friendly advice , no hate 🤝🏻✌🏻 )
PL needs more American ownership who is used to operating at a high level of sporting sophistication. City ownership running circles around snaggletooth British owners who aren’t smart enough to keep up.
There are only two EPL clubs without foreign investment .. Brentford & Brighton . Every other club has partial or complete ownership by overseas parties .
city have turned Prem into La Liga ...when was the last time that league was won by someone other than real or Barca ...boring .what is anti-competitive is for City to buy up 100 million players from clubs and sit them on the bench
First 😢
CAS already proofed the 115 has no merit.
CAS made said something along the lines the rules broke stated by UEFA are old and shouldn't be punished, PL is completely different
@@Rageebait Not quite, it found City not guilty of the charges they considered, some were timebarred and not consider but where they stated it had found not enough evidence for UEFAs claims. They did however found City guilty of not cooperating and gave them a €10m fine, and you'd expect that would be how this 115 charges case ends up as well. Not enough evidence, a fine for lack of cooperation. The recent case they are discussing in this video however has nothing to do with the 115 charges, this is about the changes in the finance rules, and specificially the updates made in February which City now has filed a case against (and is said to get backing from Newcastle, Chelsea, Everton and Villa)
@AhmedIsmail-wt6cp
It’s “proved” not “proofed” and your nonsense viewpoint is as bad as your grammar
I didn't realize City haters are the biggest FING liars.
😂 city delusion is funny af