We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall) header
We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall) profile picture

A fresh #CFC fan brand providing you with news & stats at a glance. Brought to you by the original 'Breathe Chelsea' team.

Joined May 2022
Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)Photo by We've Won It All (@cfcwonitall)
An incredibly proud personal moment watching the banner I created alongside @onlyapound, Steve Clint & @kingarnanda make its Stamford Bridge debut last night. 🙌 Huge thanks to DJ for the opportunity & to everyone who left a kind message or comment 🤝 Serious goosebumps 💙 #CFC
1
7
40
3,573
We've Won It All retweeted
I find it bizarre that so many people believe Man City will be getting a simple relegation. Step back from the Commission’s decision and look at the holistic implication of what it says… That, over the course of 8 years, Manchester City’s executives and board directors undertook multiple endeavours of systematic cheating on a massive scale, requiring criminal acts involving: false accounting, fraud, and conspiracy to defraud. The impact was vast and undoubtedly fully corrupted the integrity of the Premier League for over a decade, irreparably damaging the league, its brand, its participants, its partners, and its fans. Once discovered, they stone-walled, obfuscated and misled regulators, even committing further criminal acts to avoid justice, including: perjury, forgery, and perverting the course of justice. To action these criminal feats, they needed to have leveraged state powers of the UAE, to which they clearly have full access and control. And even now, when they have been found guilty, they continue to deny and delay, undertaking as much lawfare as is open to them. The Commission has a duty to issue sanctions that will protect the ongoing integrity of the league. This is made explicit in precedent. Relegation, very clearly, does not achieve that objective. It has always been obvious that the club must be expelled if it is not sold to new, independent owners. There is no alternative sanction that can protect the league from such malign and powerful actors. Given the Commission lacks the power to enforce such a sanction, I suspect they refer the matter to the IFR and apply significant sanctions that will keep Man City out of the league long enough for the IFR to act. Given the Premier League is yet to charge Man City for seasons 2018/19 - 2025/26, that also offers further leverage to ensure the objective is met.
91
107
10
942
84,971
We've Won It All retweeted
Desde el Chelsea FC queremos enviar nuestras más sinceras condolencias a la familia de Jesús de Miguel, a sus compañeros y a todo el CD Tenerife. Todo nuestro cariño y apoyo en este momento tan difícil. 💙
55
1,488
23
16,335
163,765
We've Won It All retweeted
This is actually good piece by Borson (see substack link in the quoted post below). I disagree with him that the PL was surprised by the outcome. It was entirely expected. What was not expected was how Man City sought to defend it. Their concocted defence was a shock and one of the most serious findings made by the Commission. In the Everton v Premier League Appeal Board decision of 26 February 2024, chaired by Sir Gary Hickinbottom, para. 199 states: “... sanctions in this field are not essentially punitive: their primary purpose is to protect the integrity of the relevant competition…” And; “... as an aim of any sanction, punishment is far less important than maintaining the integrity of the competition and thus the sport of football, with deterrence being an important overlapping aim.” The Commission has decided that Man City not only cheated, but that it’s a Related Party to UAE state-owned assets… and what’s more, that they will go to extreme, criminal lengths of fraud, perjury, forgery, etc. in order to “succeed”. It begs the question… how can you protect the integrity of the league with participants such as those? I don’t believe it’s possible.
stefanborson.substack.com/p/… Great piece by @slbsn Very detailed and articulate and unfortunately not a good read from a city perspective
14
21
225
32,141
We've Won It All retweeted
A difficult run in the Premier League since March. 😤🔵 📸 @OptaAnalyst
10
28
723
29,745
We've Won It All retweeted
Chelsea Confidential 🔵 ⁉️ Rival intrigue at Estevao exclusion 🇧🇷 Brazil squad reveal today 🪽 Alonso: Este a winger, not a wing back 🇪🇸 Ramon liked 🐎 Scott & Camara 🧤 New #CFC job 👇 Etc dailymail.com/sport/football…
8
17
3
207
61,142
We've Won It All retweeted
Like the 115 case itself, the potential ramifications - and the benefits to City from cheating - stretch way, way beyond the things that seem most obvious
REVEALED - the true extent of Man City’s financial advantage via cheating: £4.6bn? sportingintelligence832.subs…
11
89
1
525
34,385
We've Won It All retweeted
Well done Spurs. #CFC truly awful. This one is on Alonso. The “fluidity” we hoped for wasn’t there with Quenda after 20 mins so to wait until 72 mins to bring on Estevao - who looked demoralised - just scandalous. Danny Welbeck not brought on earlier also v depressing. #CFCTOT
33
32
1
440
22,120
We've Won It All retweeted
I can’t get over that performance and how pathetic and inept it was. Probably the worst performance I’ve seen at Stamford Bridge in recent years and there’s a long list to choose from. Absolutely shocking.
7
13
118
2,445
We've Won It All retweeted
I can’t get over today. That was an absolute disgrace. How can you perform like that and watch your players and not make a change? Absolutely shambolic.
7
18
2
155
4,678
We've Won It All retweeted
Awful tactics. Awful 90 mins. Shambolic from all of them, from on the field and off it. Disgrace.
2
12
75
1,661
We've Won It All retweeted
Playing once a week, nearly 4½ years under this ownership, roughly £2bn spent, and this is the performance we deliver. It doesn't look or feel anything like a Chelsea side.
19
80
8
440
17,166
We've Won It All retweeted
But he has “aura”
1
5
475
We've Won It All retweeted
What was the point of signing Welbeck if he isn’t going to play in games like this? No Joao Pedro and all we’ve done is go long with no one to aim for. Just doesn’t make any sense
117
312
7
4,664
65,698
We've Won It All retweeted
This game was way worse than the Brentford game. WAY worse. This performance is on par with some of our worst performances from last season. It was that bad. I honestly can’t believe how bad we were. My heads on Mars. Embarrassing
72
334
8
4,185
52,705
We've Won It All retweeted
Unlike other losses. This is gonna be a tough one for Alonso to overcome and the complete mismanagement of the game at home also a real dent to reason optimism.
11
12
1
169
4,257
We've Won It All retweeted
Well worth reading for those wondering why Manchester City spent so much money on many of England’s most expensive lawyers only to be found guilty of ‘systematically breaking Premier League rules for nearly a decade’. youtu.be/NjsJyay0tNM?is=S3V-…
⚖️ 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗠𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆’𝘀 𝗛𝗮𝗶𝗹 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗳𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦… 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘔𝘢𝘯 𝘊𝘪𝘵𝘺’𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵. We know that at the 2024 Independent Commission for their “115 charges”, Man City presented their “irrefutable evidence” in support of their defence known as the “CPC Explanation”. In short, Man City acknowledged the leaked emails stated they were transferring funds from the corporate owner, ADUG, to sponsors but that all the authors of those emails were just “confused” and made “false assumptions” for 8 years. Man City’s defence was that the money flows being described in the emails and documents actually related to money flows from the central government of the UAE (a.k.a. the Crown Prince Court, a.k.a. CPC). The Commission decided this defence and “irrefutable evidence” in support of it was all fake - a “concoction” after the fact. This alone will backfire heavily. It creates serious aggravating factors for any sanction, which really should lead to a recommendation to permanently expel this ownership. But had it worked, they still had a challenge… Man City would have still breached all the same PL rules! You see, there’s no realistic possibility that Man City’s CPC Explanation could have succeeded AND at the same time, not led to Man City and its Abu Dhabi state-owned sponsors being determined Related Parties (something that the Commission found to be the case anyway). As Related Parties, the relationships needed to be reported (they weren’t) and Fair Market Value (FMV) be assessed for each RPT (they weren’t). RPT stands for Related Party Transaction. So, why do it? Why risk further sanctions and even criminal prosecutions for no real gain? Well, this was only part 1 of their defence strategy. The second part was happening concurrently in another, different proceeding between Man City and the PL. In 2021, the PL updated its rules regarding RPTs and changed them to Associated Party Transactions (APTs). This was because they had learned (from the evidence Man City was finally forced to hand over by the High Court in 2020) that autocratic nation states like the UAE could readily hide the true nature of Related Parties to by-pass the rules. Newcastle was about to be acquired by Saudi Arabia at this time too and the PL realised they had to act quickly before they risked the possibility of more nation-state cheating. The APT rules widened the definition and made it much harder for nation states to by-pass the rules and repeat Man City’s cheating. In early 2024, when Man City was preparing its defence for its “115 charges”, the PL clubs voted to tighten the APT rules even further, once again making it even harder to cheat them. In reality, they went too far on one modification that required the clubs (instead of the PL) to prove FMV whilst at the same time, not granting the clubs access to the database used to determine FMV. It was unfair and opened up the rules to challenge (whichever lawyer wrote the amendment was an idiot). The impact of the amendment was that it would make Man City’s excessive, non-commercial APTs (like their proposed Etihad deal) much harder to get approved. Man City launched a Section X challenge against the APT rules in early 2024 with a number of different aims…
22
57
344
86,455
We've Won It All retweeted
I have previously speculated that Man City launched a Section X appeal to challenge the Commission’s (and Appeal Board’s) decision to publish a “final award” lacking sanctions. If so, it would likely be chaired by Dyson or Neuberger - both former Supreme Court justices. It would make sense to draft in Eadie for such a matter going up against Pannick (who excels in appeals on matters of law).
Replying to @TheLawyerCSmith
After a policy change last year, Eadie, who is still an independent member of the Bar, is now able to take on non-Government clients. The experienced KC has more Supreme Court appearances in the past 10 years than anyone else, followed by City's barrister, Lord Pannick KC. 3/5
16
10
2
177
49,731
We've Won It All retweeted
This Section X decision was issued whilst the Independent Commission hearing was ongoing. And it ultimately killed Man City’s defence at the Commission because it had been the crucial second part. If the FMV concept was considered unlawful or impossible to correctly ascertain AND the Commission sided with Man City’s defence… then they would have got away scot-free. It was a complex, “Hail Mary” legal strategy worthy of someone like Pannick. And it failed on both parts. That has some serious implications - three worth calling out explicitly: 1., It required Man City to present false evidence and pervert the course of justice. This will lead to far more severe sanctions and should lead to criminal charges. It also does even more extreme damage to the UAE’s reputation. 2., It means the appeal cannot possibly succeed at absolving Man City on the facts and the legal team knows this - as soon as the Section X arbitration decided FMV assessments were lawful, their CPC Explanation was doomed. The appeal is a charade for PR purposes only now (unless the Commission made a very unlikely fatal error in law). 3., It opens up Man City to even more charges and further sanctions… The Independent Commission’s primary finding with respect to the sham sponsor contracts was that all monies sourced from ADUG should constitute equity in the accounts. The secondary finding was that Man City and its Abu Dhabi state-owned sponsors were Related Parties regardless. The definition of those relationships would not change without serious changes to the parties, which did not occur. The Sponsors remained state-owned and the Owner/Directors of Man City remained the same too. This means Man City would have kept breaching all the same financial rules until the RPT rules were replaced with APT rules in late 2021. But here’s the kicker… at the Section X arbitration on the APT rules, Man City argued that APT rules were unlawful and as such, the RPT rules remained in force… and the panel agreed! Therefore, the RPT rules remained in situ until 22 November 2024, when brand new APT rules were voted in. That means even more sponsorships during 2021-2024, that previously would have been safe from charges because they were approved under the APT regime, are no longer safe and are open to charge. Examples are the Aldar properties and Emirates Palace Mandarin Oriental sponsorships signed in 2022. Man City’s attack on the APT rules actually opens them up to even larger PSR breaches when they are charged for 2018/19-2025/26. Whoopsie!
10
20
2
198
16,904
We've Won It All retweeted
Out tomorrow on @SkySportsPL YouTube
450
2,193
440
25,730
2,017,306