I merely support City, and as with fans of any other club, this applies no matter who comes along and buys the majority shareholding. It is beyond our control. One day Sheikh Mansour will be gone, but City will be stronger for his involvement. And there is no evidence of books being cooked. If any exists, where is it? As pointed out above, City are more scrutinised by the football authorities than almost any other club, and have passed all the stringent tests so far set. So no corruption with regard to City. Plenty of corruption among those doing the scrutinising, though, as we have seen with the scandals at UEFA and FIFA, as well as a de-facto conflict of interest issue by having somebody so closely associated with one club (United) in leading positions in all football's governing bodies. Might as well add to that the self-elected G14 cartel dedicated to maintaining football's status quo and ensuring that the European elite goes unchallenged forever. It used to be claimed that 'City are merely a rich man's plaything.' City fans responded from the start by pointing out the wider strategy. 'He will be gone as soon as he gets bored,' the kindergarden critics would say, bless their little cotton socks... Now the very same people have moved the goalposts. Toys are being thrown out of prams on an unprecedented scale. To ensure the survival of a small regional power is way beyond the influence of a football club on the other side of the world even with Pep in charge. City are part of a larger strategy, but only a small part. Involvement in PL football can help project a more positive image of that regional power for sure, but its visibility also brings about wider scrutiny of the regime-a regime which incidentally has completely normal business relations with the western world, for good or ill. Those who feign concern about the regime in Abu Dhabi after showing complete indifference towards it prior to City's successful transformation would presumably wish to isolate it and allow it to act unimpeded by any scutiny? It is particularly curious that those of a progressive political bias choose to join in with this unprecedented concern when knowing full well that Abu Dhabi is nowhere near the worst regime in the world in historical terms, and despite an awareness that its crimes and failings hardly register when compared to those of our own governments. As I said above, when was the last time Abu Dhabi sent an army halfway round the world to illegally invade and lay waste to a nation? Where is Abu Dhabi's Vietnam or even Ireland? Its Hiroshima and Nagasaki or its Gulag? There are despots and then there are despots... But of course, such previously unmentioned concern about what goes on in Abu Dhabi arises simply because their favourite football clubs are being brushed aside by City. If the Sheikh's takeover had been botched, no interest in the affairs of Abu Dhabi would be in evidence from such people. For what it's worth, the UAE comes in at 21st in the UN's 'World Happiness Report'; Britain three places above at 18th... Coming from the area of Manchester where City are based, I can also say that I have not previously seen such a local transformation as that which has taken place since the Sheikh bought the club out, and it is an area which had long been considered beyond any kind of revival. I seem to remember reading about Fred Done, the bookmaker and United fan, saying something similar. Not really sure about the relevance of Qatar's World Cup bid when Qatar has nothing to do with City and is locked in bitter conflict with the regime in which City's owners serve. Nor why I should be willing or able to take anybody through that bid step by step.