PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[argyle]

I mean on paper you could see it that way, but the arbitration panel are unlikely to end up being manned by the intern, the coffee boy and a paralegal knocking about….

These will be decorated people with significant reputations and who are not going to make a ruling based upon what the PL want.

Of course that doesn’t mean a win is any more or less likely, simply it’s not likely to be the kangaroo court some understandably fear.

I'm sure they will be very knowledgable people but it will be people on the PL's payroll in some way? That's a conflict of interest.

 

[Jesus2020]

Not bothered in the slightest. Not even read anything to do with all this. I've had my Aguero moment, I've seen us win things I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. I've experienced goals, games, wins, defeats in finals, last minute winners in important games, seen us go toe to toe with the big boys where before we were not able too. I've seen the 6-1. I've seen the fucking lot and no matter what happens from there I don't care because I've already lived it, breathed it, felt it with every inch of my heart and soul.

 

[Metalartin]

What would happen to a club who didn't sign because of any new rules the PL decide to add? They make it sound like a choice, like UEFA did with FFP(which everyone knew was bent).

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

That clause about disputes being subject to the English courts: does that mean City could go to the court to dispute anything the Panel or the PL came up with, but the PL couldn't go to the court if they didn't like what the Panel said?

My take.

The law says that decisions of private orgs aren’t subject to judicial review in the same way as public authority decisions are.

The general approach of the courts to decisions made by bodies like the PL is not to interfere with their decisions. They are the experts. Regardless of what the rules do or do not say about where final says are had the high court DOES retain a supervisory role over the procedure such bodies use to make their decisions.

That’s helpful to us because if the PL panel do not apply the high bar reasoning CAS did to support any finding of deliberate book cooking then that in itself is something the high court can look at. See paras 12 and 13 here

Kieren Fallon v Horseracing Regulatory Authority

0: [object Object]. 1: [object Object]. 2: [object Object]. 3: [object Object]. 4: [object Object]. 5: [object Object]. 6: [object Object]. 7: [object Obje..

vlex.co.uk

I am sure the PL won’t do a thorough job at first instance, either through cock up or conspiracy.

 

[jgmcfc]

That’s not quite right either. Right about JR not being directly applicable, but not right that the court can’t have a supervisory role and look into procedural elements of the decision making. The Fallon case is the one to look at. Essentially the HC would step into a JR style role. If they didn’t see evidence in PL decisions that the high standards needed to assert fraud/deliberate bad faith CAS did (see projectrivers previous post on that) then the HC could effectively make them. The court won’t be the final decision maker, they’d send it back to the PL. But the steer would be v clear.

Just my take as an (ex) lawyer with a bit of experience in this.

Oh, and Panncik represented Fallon ;-)

Thank you - hadn’t come across that case as a newly qualified lawyer who is (largely) confined to crime & family.

It makes for interesting reading as does Bradley v The Jockey Club (2004) and will inevitably drag proceedings out even longer. Nick De Marco KC has said (albeit partly in jest) that he expects this to span upwards of 4 years. I’m just surprised the PL are willing to open this can of worms, especially in light of the government white paper, surely any misstep would simple fan the flames and bolster the government’s position (assuming the PM sticks by his reported stance).

 

[Fuzzy80]

I doubt they will strip City of any titles if they find City guilty for a number of reasons, and whatever they do will set a precedent for any future case against any club. So they will have to be careful. There are all sorts of financial and technical issues such a move would create.

1)
Look at the Aguero moment, that is a peice of IP gold, voted the best Premier League moment ever. If they strip City of the title that year, that footage becomes worthless. Should the Premier League re-pay Sky and all the other broadcasters that have bought rights and made programmes featuring that footage? Obviously each programme made by Sky and many more celebrating the seasons when City won would need editing and possibly a repayment of royalties. What about the FIFA video game (FIFA 12, FIFA 14) and any IP payment made, are there clauses in these contracts? So the ripple effect on the value of IP could be very relevant.

2)
If City were stripped of a league title: does the team that finished second win the league; do you delete City's results and redraw the table; think of another way; or does no one win it? How does this affect European qualification and relegation in the relevant seasons? Who can claim losses and off whom?

3)
Should prize money for where you finished in the league be redistributed once you've decided how to reorganise the final standings?

4)
What about bets lost and bets paid out by the bookmakers? How are these resolved?

5)
Does the West Ham - Sheffield United incident set any sort of precedent. West Ham stayed up at the expense of the Blades by fielding ineligible players. West Ham didn't lose their Premier League place despite effectively cheating. There must be reasons documented why West Ham were not relegated, which would be a precedent.

6)
Results and titles have never to my knowledge been overturned in English football for any reason. If City were stripped, would this set a precedent for other historic cases to emerge? Such as the Louis Edwards slush fund ie how did a tin pot club like Manchester United who had not won a trophy for 50 years get Duncan Edwards from under Wolves noses and the nephew of Newcastle's legendary Jackie Milburn, ie Bobby Charlton, away from Newcastle United? Are Manchester United's titles in the 50s and 60s in jeopardy?

7)
Arbitration is set out in Section X of the EPL handbook and it states it is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996. Section 66-71 of this act give City the right of appeal in court for a variety of reasons, on points of law, if they've been treated unfairly etc. So any punishment could theoretically be overturned if it's not been determined in a fair, fit and proper manner, without basis etc.

Hopefully, City can prove their case, but even if they lose, I think this is all being sensationalised to sell papers (or content, click bait etc). I can't see any punishment being that harsh, 10-20 points and a fine, ie one season damaged.

Also would the owners of clubs like Brighton, Brentford, Bournemouth and many others risk personal retribution in any form from our owners or fans if they voted to expel City from the Premier League? It would cost Mansour and Co millions, and I'm sure as noble as they are publicly, they can wield the axe if they choose to on anyone or any business. Would any of these owners want to be punched by a City fan at any point in their life in the future? I know these are less savoury points to raise, but they exist nonetheless.

I think the fans of opposing clubs would love it and all that, but it just wouldn’t happen.

The owners want damage to us moving forward, they would love relegation. But I cannot see that.

A points deduction, I can see be the conclusion, fine and something to try and limit our turnover going forward.

That blues is most likely the worst.

If we did it all, than the pipping Liverpool, the Aguerrrooo!! Then one season we start 10 points behind, brilliant, what a laugh for all those memories.

 

[JewelZee]

I would be gobsmacked if we cannot find recourse in the English or European courts. The premier league must answer to the law of the land otherwise they could destroy any club anytime. Maybe it’s a naive viewpoint but that seems incredible. What the point hiring lawyers to fight an unwinnable case?

It’s their league and their rules but if said rules are being manipulated and unfairly applied against a member and that member has no way to defend itself!

I personally think the amount of charges thrown at us is a tactic to get us to come to the table and take a deal. The league comes out clean and self regulated and city take their medicine which will allow the red clubs to take advantage. Our good character will once again be destroyed. It’s the price we play for playing a game this is rigged.

Agree 1000%. Of course City will have recourse. To believe anything different is nonsense.

 

[Scaley]

My man! I knew this idea we can't take the PL decision to the courts was nonsense.

My missus is a solicitor who was working with a District Judge today who is a BIG City fan, as both are Blues they were naturally talking about the charges and he was saying the same thing, there has to be an avenue to challenge a decision or it would be against the Laws of Natural Justice. Anyway as City have stated that they’ve been expecting this I’m pretty relaxed about it, you don’t have a four billion dollar asset run by a bunch of chancers.

 

[Metalartin]

I am sure the PL won’t do a thorough job at first instance, either through cock up or conspiracy.

Agreed, no confidence that they wont side with the PL no matter what City bring forward. The second one, if there is any chance City could take it to high court... They might possibly consider the ramifications of that if they haven't proven their case in accordance with English Law.

That might mean the PL can't be stopped from issuing their punishments until City can prove in court, that the PL made a grave error, which they will severely pay for. The PL would need to be punished and the relevant charges reversed in retrospect. But that would still be something.

Maybe this will turn out to be different but I don't see how any City fan isn't thinking back to what everyone was trying to appease City fans with about the Adjudication Chamber of the CFCB. Anything that's been said about independence, reputations, proficiency and professionalism was all said, before they tried to throw the book at City without having any actual evidence. It was all bollocks.

This will probably be cleared up soon by people who actually know for certain, maybe even the PL or City will clarify. The "in accordance with English Law" part has given me some hope in the meantime because that seems pretty implicit. Time to log off and forget it for the night.

 

[hammocity]

I would be gobsmacked if we cannot find recourse in the English or European courts. The premier league must answer to the law of the land otherwise they could destroy any club anytime. Maybe it’s a naive viewpoint but that seems incredible. What the point hiring lawyers to fight an unwinnable case?

It’s their league and their rules but if said rules are being manipulated and unfairly applied against a member and that member has no way to defend itself!

I personally think the amount of charges thrown at us is a tactic to get us to come to the table and take a deal. The league comes out clean and self regulated and city take their medicine which will allow the red clubs to take advantage. Our good character will once again be destroyed. It’s the price we play for playing a game this is rigged.

I'm no taproom lawyer but like you I'd find it incredulous if we can't recourse to a higher jurisdiction to challenge a pre determined decision handed out by a biased Quasi "court".