K

#GlazersOut

[James Ducker @TelegraphDucker]

From Etihad Airways 60-page submission to John Kerry, US Department Secretary of State, Antony Foxx, US Department of Transportation Secretary and Penny Pritzker, US Department of Commerce Secretary on May 31, 2015

[Rui Pinto @RuiPinto_FL]

Back in 2014, there was a man who was already aware of the irregularities involving Manchester City. That man now runs FIFA. The infamous Gianni Infantino, then UEFA General Secretary, abused his authority, shared confidential documents and, in short, outmanoeuvred the Investigatory Chamber, doing everything in his power to ensure that both Manchester City and PSG would merely receive a fine, avoiding a deeper investigation that could have led to a Champions League ban. All of these details were also revealed through Football Leaks.
Given his actions as UEFA General Secretary and, more recently, as FIFA President, I can only say, in my humble opinion, that Gianni Infantino has become a cancer on football and should have no place in the future of the game.

[Nemanja Matic @NemanjaMatic]

I want my title bonus 😀

[David de Gea @D_DeGea]

So we’re talking again…

[Fabrizio Romano @FabrizioRomano]

🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: Premier League confirm an independent Commission has found Manchester City GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES related to serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules over a nine-season period, and the majority of charges in relation to its failure to co-operate with the League’s investigation.

The club has the right to appeal the independent Commission’s findings and has until Friday 2 October to exercise that right.

The Premier League Board’s intention is that the full process (including any appeals and publication of relevant decisions) is concluded as soon as possible.

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:
- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

[Melissa Reddy @MelissaReddy_]

Manchester City were first informed that they had been found guilty of more than 100 breaches of the Premier League's financial rules in the summer.

Sources told ESPN club chiefs were initially made aware of the findings of the independent panel in July. It was followed by an aggressive approach in the summer transfer window, during which seven senior signings arrived at the Etihad Stadium at a cost of more than £450 million…

https://t.co/0fhHi2geUd

@RobDawsonESPN

[The Touchline | 𝐓 @TouchlineX]

🚨 𝗕𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚: Republic of Ireland players lowered their heads during the National anthem of Israel.

The Irish players are also wearing BLACK armbands in recognition of all lives lost in Gaza. 🇮🇪🙏🏻

[David de Gea @D_DeGea]

So……

Let’s talk.

How many Premier League titles have I won then? 🤔

[David Ornstein @David_Ornstein]

🚨 EXCLUSIVE: Manchester City found guilty on virtually all charges relating to breaches of Premier League financial regulations. #MCFC expected to appeal against verdict issued by independent commission. Sanctions undecided, process ongoing @TheAthleticFC https://t.co/Muxqp4beK9

[Nathan Salt @NathSalt1]

Best in class? Yeah right.

Ineos fail against the very buzzwords they claim to believe in.

Piece on state of #mufc

https://t.co/JfcEDgOTlP

[(fan) Frank 🧠🇾🇪 @FrankEra_]

So let me get this straight. Premier League officials can get a massive decision wrong, even after spending SEVEN minutes looking at it, give United a pat on the back and then move on to the next week like nothing happened?

If you made a substantial mistake in a normal workplace that directly affected your company’s results, there would be consequences. You’d probably get fired.

Where is that same accountability for football officiating in England? Oh yeah, non existent.

[FPL Frasier @FPLfrasier]

I know he wasn’t on VAR. But, how is he allowed to referee City games?

[United Lifers @UtdLifers]

HERE WE GO

The VAR referee Matt Donohue managed sports provisions at Gresswell school for 8 years.

Guess who funded that school's sports programmes while he was there?

Yes, Manchester City.

They funded this guy for nearly a decade.

[Fan_Monty @AFC_Monty_]

So the same ref has made the exact same ‘error’ twice now. Both directly benefiting the club thats owner employed him to referee abroad for huge money? 😂

[Kev @KevEastSports]

For VAR checks, subs and fouls etc the game was stopped for ~8m52s in the 2nd half

5 mins were added

[Rob Dawson @RobDawsonESPN]

Shambolic that during a review of more than two minutes no one in the VAR booth thinks to send Michael Oliver to the screen to look at Fernandez’s potential interference. Sure Man United are thrilled with “an acknowledgment of an error of judgement” three hours after full-time.

[Callum @_callumstone]

Michael Oliver, the referee who was paid £20,000 by Man City owner Sheikh Mansour to referee a match in the UAE has been appointed to officiate the Manchester Derby.

One of many examples of him making up rules at United’s expense.

Nothing to see here.

[Fabrizio Romano @FabrizioRomano]

🚨 OFFICIAL: Pro Ref confirm “an error of judgement” in Haaland’s goal — also informing Man United directly.

“Following the incident in the 60th minute of Sunday's Premier League fixture between Manchester United and Manchester City at Old Trafford, we can provide clarification regarding Erling Haaland’s awarded goal.

“The on-field decision was offside against Erling Haaland – that was checked by VAR and he was found to be in an onside position.

“In the same attack, it was established that Enzo Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore that makes any offside offence subjective, however, on this occasion, the VAR did not recognise the likely impact of his position and should have recommended an on-field review.

“Contact has been made with Manchester United this evening to acknowledge what we deem is an error of judgement. A review of the incident will take place.”

[utdreport @utdreport]

Breaking: Man City’s goal was a mistake. Pro Ref spokesperson said:

“Following the incident in the 60th minute of Sunday's Premier League fixture between #mufc and Manchester City at Old Trafford, we can provide clarification regarding Erling Haaland’s awarded goal.

The on-field decision was offside against Erling Haaland – that was checked by VAR and he was found to be in an onside position.

In the same attack, it was established that Enzo Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore that makes any offside offence subjective, however, on this occasion, the VAR did not recognise the likely impact of his position and should have recommended an on-field review.
“Contact has been made with Manchester United this evening to acknowledge what we deem is an error of judgement. A review of the incident will take place.” [@sistoney67]

[Simon Stone @sistoney67]

Confirmed. Man City goal WAS a mistake. Pro Ref spokesperson said: “Following the incident in the 60th minute of Sunday's Premier League fixture between Manchester United and Manchester City at Old Trafford, we can provide clarification regarding Erling Haaland’s awarded goal.
“The on-field decision was offside against Erling Haaland – that was checked by VAR and he was found to be in an onside position.
“In the same attack, it was established that Enzo Fernandez did not play the ball and therefore that makes any offside offence subjective, however, on this occasion, the VAR did not recognise the likely impact of his position and should have recommended an on-field review.
“Contact has been made with Manchester United this evening to acknowledge what we deem is an error of judgement. A review of the incident will take place.”