Manchester City have been handed a fresh blow to their hopes of a successful appeal against the guilty verdict for financial breaches. Reports have emerged that evidence provided by City to UEFA in a past case could undermine the club’s attempt to clear their name in the appeal.
Last week saw City be found guilty of 114 of the 115 charges for financial breaches brought against them by the Premier League. The English top flight have claimed that City arranged “sham” sponsorship deals to inflate their revenues by £900million.
City's defence under pressure
City are maintaining their innocence and are making it clear that they are denying any wrongdoing, claiming to have “irrefutable evidence” that will help their case. An independent three-person commission will now oversee City's appeal, with a ruling anticipated before the end of the year.
Central to City's defence is the assertion that the alleged 'sham' deals were entirely legitimate and funded by the Abu Dhabi government, rather than the club's owners at Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG). Premier League regulations permit state-owned bodies to sponsor clubs, which could potentially absolve City of any wrongdoing and demonstrate that ADUG did not fabricate illegitimate arrangements.
UEFA evidence emerges
However, that line of defence may already be in serious jeopardy following revelations last week that the club's title sponsors, Etihad Airways, informed the United States Department of Commerce, Transportation, and State in 2015 that claims of government-funded sponsorships were "false" during an investigation into state-owned airlines.
The Times has now claimed that evidence submitted by City to UEFA could further damage their appeal against allegations of "sham" sponsorship arrangements. It has been reported that City informed UEFA more than six years ago that two payments of £15million each — made in 2012 and 2013 — were made by Jaber Mohamed, who served as general director of the United Arab Emirates' Crown Prince Court (CPC).
City are reported to have not told evidence given to UEFA that Mohamed had direct ties to the CPC, instead stating that "the payment was caused to be made by ADUG." It has further been reported that the payments in question should originally have been made by Etisalat, one of the companies that sponsors City and is majority-owned by the United Arab Emirates.
Despite City arguing in their defence that it was the Abu Dhabi government that funded the alleged "sham" sponsorship deals, they apparently failed to disclose this to UEFA in evidence submitted years earlier. This development represents a second significant setback for City's appeal prospects, compounded by evidence previously provided by key club sponsor Etihad.
Potential sanctions loom
The UAE-owned airline gave evidence to the United States Department of Commerce, Transportation, and State in 2015 during an investigation that it was "false" that the government paid for sponsorship deals. A statement at the time read: "We are government-owned and have been since our founding. We are and have always been clear that we do not receive any subsidies from the Abu Dhabi government, and that we are financed through a combination of equity, shareholder and commercial loans. Our shareholder's equity and loans are not subsidies under any applicable definition; they are the means by which the Abu Dhabi government has sensibly invested in a successful business model."
City are confronting the possibility of severe sanctions should their appeal prove unsuccessful, with Premier League clubs in agreement that they should be removed from the top flight and face penalties spanning multiple seasons. Removal from the Premier League represents one potential sanction, though it would require 15 clubs to back the proposal.
According to Sky Sports, Premier League clubs 'do not expect' City to remain in the top flight next season should their appeal be rejected. It has also been suggested that 'many believe' a points deduction would prove inadequate if it resulted in City spending merely one campaign outside the Premier League. The same three-person panel that delivered the guilty verdict will determine sanctions after the Premier League submits their recommendations and City presents its defence.
