Is Manchester City’s rage against the machine more a posture than a plan? | Paul MacInnes
Club’s relentless railing against organisations that challenge them helps rally fans but do they really have an alternative?
Manchester City pulled no punches in describing the failings of their opponents. “The decision contains mistakes, misinterpretations and confusions fundamentally born a basic lack of due process”, they argued in a vituperative assessment. “There remain significant unresolved matters raised by Manchester City FC as part of what the Club has found to be a wholly unsatisfactory, curtailed and hostile process.” Where do you go after that?
Well, five years on from the above remarks, issued in response to charges from Uefa alleging breaches of financial fair play (FFP) rules – charges that were found proved but then overturned on appeal – City are still angry, but this time with the Premier League. On Monday their chief lawyer, Simon Cliff, took the liberty of writing to the 19 other clubs in the top flight to tell them not to trust the organisation’s word. According to Cliff, the league’s summary of the outcome of the arbitration brought by City over associated party transaction (APT) rules was “misleading and contained several inaccuracies”. The league’s plans to update their rules, meanwhile, were “an unwise course [which] would likely to lead to further legal proceedings with further legal costs”. The league should change tack, Cliff argued, as “it is critical for member clubs to feel that they can have trust in their regulator”.
