PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Kamaro011]

Thanks for that pal. Weird how anyone asking any kind of question apart from "Why are City being persecuted for nothing?!" is instantly a wind up. What I will say is that if City are found innocent, the Premier League need suing. 115 charges is insane if not proven. On the other hand, with Everton being docked 10 points for a lesser charge, surely a guilty punishment would be huge? What are your thoughts on Everton and Forest btw? I'm wondering if the PL have made them patsies so they can slip these charges on City and then say "See, its not just you!".

Do you think stripping titles to appease the "bigger clubs" is the agenda?

If a guilty verdict comes in (NOT SAYING IT WILL), most fans of Liverpool, Arsenal etc are saying that stripping of titles etc is an absolute must. That'd be absolutely devastating, wouldn't it? Can't see it myself.

There will be no title strippings. The potential lawsuit especially any relegation teams where City win in that season is not worth for it.

 

[FMwkdsoul]

This is what's so odd. Most people who've read beyond the hysterical "115 Charges" headlines, are struggling to see where the PL are going with this.

If they haven't got compelling new evidence, or a high value whistle-blower, after the CAS decision, what exactly is the point in all of this?

Beat the white report recommending an independent regulator, 'look we can keep our house in order!' and pandoras box is open and they are looking fucked.

 

[Iassel]

If they find us guilty under the balance of probabilities, with the overriding inference of fraud, than City are able to take this to a proper Court.

Sorry TH, you’re going to have to corroborate that claim with a source - it’s clear that City have tried and failed to move this to a commercial court already, and the PL rules are clear that the only appeal route is back to another tribunal on procedural grounds.

 

[Berts Neck]

The dragon has been slayed.

Well done mate..a bit too windy today for candles outside that shithole called anfield...

 

[waspish]

Sorry TH, you’re going to have to corroborate that claim with a source - it’s clear that City have tried and failed to move this to a commercial court already, and the PL rules are clear that the only appeal route is back to another tribunal on procedural grounds.

If they say will guilty of fraud it will be a criminal act so will go to court

 

[Dribble]

We just don't know to what extent will the PL charges differ from the ones that failed at CAS.

Will the PL follow the example of the YouTube attack video believed to be commissioned by LFC owners i.e. the FSG/New York Times consortium.



Our beloved friend Nicky Harris and a NYT hack make the astonishing claim (approx 50 mins) that former City exec Simon Pearce committed perjury at CAS. A crime that carries a seven year prison sentence in Switzerland. They assert that when asked if Pearce personally arranged payments from HHSM to MCFC he lied when he absolutely denied it without equivocation.

So if the PL are to make the same accusation to the IC surely that is not a dispute about MCFC breaking the rules of the PL. Its another example of a criminal matter like "false accounting" and "overstating revenues".
As a lay person Its hard too understand how a guilty verdict on the most serious charges would make it impossible for the Police/DPP/SFO not to intervene.

The PL must know this, we thought they went nuclear when they announced the charges but are they really prepared to escalate into criminality in order to shaft City.

This is what's became more apparent to me as the weeks rolled by. The PL have all but accused City of fraud, but have never explicitly levelled the term at us? Why?

My reasoning is that the moment they do, they'd be duty bound to alert the police, SFO, HMRC & the FCA, which would immediately make this a criminal matter, therefore taking this case out of their grubby hands.

Again, this has been played out in public, so I'd have thought the above-mentioned statutory bodies would be in touch asking for UEFA/the PL's evidence to start their own investigations.

This highlights the difference between a private members club's "Rules" & UK Law. In court, you actually have to produce tangible evidence, & I doubt what City have been accused of is actually unlawful.

I mean saying "This money came from legal tax-paying source A", when it came from legal tax-paying source B might raise a question or two, or even be classed as false accounting, but would an entity be made to go through what City are enduring if this was the case?

And even so, what would be the sanction, if any? UK prisons are already at full capacity. :-)

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

This is what Stefan and others have emphasised recently - that three man commission had better have very, very solid evidence indeed to find that the range of people and organisations involved have been complicit in fraud on such a scale and over such a time period. This has certainly sparked off a hysterical campaign in our "objective" media and, as is said frequently, we are already branded cheats and frauds and the severest sanctions are called for. To that extent City's reputation is damaged seriously and, if not permanently, at least in the long term.

On the other hand , the article in the Irish Examiner, published in February 2023, to which Stefan provided quotes, emphasises just how totally secret the PL process is - to the extent that we shall hear absolutely nothing until we get a bald statement of the "judgement". We can only guess at the charges, we know nothing of the evidence against us and although a date for the hearing has been fixed we cannot be told when it is or when the verdict may be announced. From the start there was cynicism, that the PL has no evidence and that the PL investigation was bumped by Levy & Co to inflict a maximum of damage to City's reputation and to scupper any attempt to introduce independent regulation of PL football.

What if Bluemooners have hit the nail firmly on the head? If the government ploughs on with its plans for independent regulation? This doesn't change the plan. When it is obvious that such regulation is definitely on the way (because the PL is bound to no date for a judgement) the redtops simply allow the charges to be dropped ( as they would have been anyway sometime). The PL say simply that the charges cannot be proven and the media go wild suggesting interference by the UK government, the Abu Dhabi government and all sorts of other conspirators
to save their influential cheating friends. Case "lost" but City's reputation destroyed. I don't think our owners will be deterred in any way at all but life may be a little more difficult and certain other clubs would certainly appear much more saintly.

Do we know what information will be made public when a decision is made?

If they don’t have to publish their findings publicly, the burden of proof can be at whatever level they deem enough to find us guilty.

 

[normskih]

The average non City fan swallows all the bullshit they read on social media etc about the charges from the Premier league.
Yesterday I was walking in Ashton wearing my City hat and some dickhead walked past and said " fucking cheats"
I said what the fuck you on about and he replied "everyone knows you cheat"
So I asked him what have we cheated at and its apparently that we pay the players off the books, basically cash in hand so to speak
I nearly pissed myself laughing and said so if we pay Haaland half a million a week cash in hand where the fuck does he stash it..under his fucking bed.
He had no answer to that nor to what exactly were the charges..turned out to be an Oldham fan..
He walked off when I said well it's unlikely the charges against us will have any bearing on you as you won't ever get back to the Premier league again.

I agree, there‘s the problem, all the time. Goodness knows how many times I have got off an Everton supporter in work or hear constant mutterings form others of “115 charges“, or “cheats”. I used to get a bit wound up by it, but now I just smile and say “let’s see” but it does get on your nerves.

 

[Dribble]

Can’t see that when only a few days ago Masters confirmed a date for the hearing has been set. If all charges are going to be dropped he wouldn’t have said that.

Last week, Masters refused to confirm a tribunal date in Parliament, which throws into doubt the widely held view our case would be held this autumn, & concluded by the summer of 2025.

The Autumn 2024 date was only ever newspaper claims, & was never confirmed by Masters to my knowledge.

Hence why the claim which the Telegraph repeated yesterday might be as valid, or full of bullshit like the autumn tribunal claim? I suppose we'll see soon enough.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

Do we know what information will be made public when a decision is made?

If they don’t have to publish their findings publicly, the burden of proof can be at whatever level they deem enough to find us guilty.

I asked this the other day but didn't get an answer.