Manchester City chief executive Ferran Soriano talk of “Premier League conspiracy theory” after the club’s conviction
Following its conviction for 114 financial offenses by an independent Premier League commission, The City strongly contests the verdict. Chief executive Ferran Soriano asserts that the club will appeal and denounces the accusations as “completely unfounded.”
Manchester City chief executive Ferran Soriano has maintained the Citizens’ innocence. In a video message to City staff after the guilty verdict was confirmed on more than 100 different charges, Soriano said the club would appeal and challenge the decision.
“The entire case brought against us by the Premier League rests on a single false accusation on us: that the owner’s personal money was secretly injected into the club through the sponsors from Abu Dhabi ,” said Soriano.
“That’s simply untrue. Irrefutable evidence has been provided to the Premier League commission, demonstrating that this could not have happened and that it did not happen any time,” the chief executive asserted. ” This evidence includes the bank statements, proof of bank transfers, witness statements, and all the necessary elements to categorically prove that the money did not come from the owner.”
Manchester City must await the sanctions imposed at a further hearing by the independent commission, but the club remains confident that the initial decision will be overturned, calling the case a full-blown conspiracy. “All the other false accusations against us stem from this single, central, and completely unfounded charge. To our surprise and that of our lawyers, after almost two years, the commission has issued an opinion that supports the Premier League conspiracy theory.”
More than one billion euros in reduced costs
According to Soriano, the opinion had to be “ignore the numerous pieces of evidence provided by the club in order to reach a manifestly erroneous conclusion” and warns that the Sky Blues’ lawyers can now “appeal by demonstrating that the opinion contains manifestly significant errors of law, principle and fact and that it is dangerous.”
