City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

So what's the judge or panel waiting for in this PL v City case? Have they issued any instructions to either party?
Is one of the parties meant to be busy doing something? Nobody knows. We only know that City objected to several peripheral or procedural matters and were u successful. The judge has castigated one or both parties regarding the length of time taken in the proceedings but that's all.
The fucking sneaky thing about these proceedings is that they are continuing following the decision of CAS.
Rather like being the slightly nearer ball on a golf green and putting second on the same line, they get a lovely "tell" from the earlier proceedings.
That allows the prosecution to avoid errors made by the original accusers, UEFA and to adjust their strategy accordingly.
I would imagine the fact there was "no evidence" to support wrong doing is still quite a large legal hurdle to overcome as we certainly haven't exceeded PL FFP limits on spending. Knowing that, the PL can surely only be pursuing the same allegations of our owner paying our sponsors bills according to information on 12 year old emails that has already proven to be not what happened.
We haven't been uncooperative with the PL as far as I'm aware so can't be fined for that in this case.
It leaves the PL between a rock and a hard place, what a shame.
Perhaps they need this amount of time to trump up some utter bollocks to make us seem guilty of something.
I'm fucking sick of it, I don't know how our ownership and execs aren't fucking sick of it. We all know from where this shit emanates and we should be plotting our revenge. May it be long and painful for our enemies.
 
Can someone please explain the 6 year limitation in English law?

Does it mean that every day we don't get charged is good news for us? So now only evidence from after 10th of April 2016 ca be used?
 
FrankSwift1 said:
Can someone please explain the 6 year limitation in English law?

Does it mean that every day we don't get charged is good news for us? So now only evidence from after 10th of April 2016 ca be used?
Click to expand...
When I worked in insurance the 6 year rule applied from the date a case is filed. So if action was brought on 1st May 2018, anything back to 30 April 2012 is relevant. The case could then run for several years without the 2012 date being affected.
I would assume that this would be the same in this case.
 
neilhb said:
When I worked in insurance the 6 year rule applied from the date a case is filed. So if action was brought on 1st May 2018, anything back to 30 April 2012 is relevant. The case could then run for several years without the 2012 date being affected.
I would assume that this would be the same in this case.
Click to expand...
I'm no lawyer myself but I believe that's correct. All this bollocks about us prevaricating in order to run the clock down is just bollocks. The law doesn't work like that.
 
To be fair there is also UEFA's 5 year statute of limitations, does this affect the PL investigation in any way?
 
WillT said:
To be fair there is also UEFA's 5 year statute of limitations, does this affect the PL investigation in any way?
Click to expand...
UEFA's statute of limitations and British law are different. British law is six years. We won't be charged so it's neither here nor there. The absolute mountain of evidence they would need would be staggering.
 

You can read about it all on this site and I know the guy posts on BM sometimes too.

I think,in summary, some of the interpretations on this thread are incorrect.

Things that come from the site above as I understand it…

There is a 6 year limitation.

The limitation is from 2016 so runs out at some point this year.

There is no new “evidence” that hasn’t already been looked at by CAS.

It is the site author’s opinion that this has come to the surface again due to the time issue but that there will also be a limit to how much time and money the PL are willing to invest into investigating one of their own stakeholders despite pressure from certain rival clubs.

Its very very unlikely that the original CAS decision will be challenged.

The PL might find some wrong doings re Academy players as other clubs have been punished for.

My own take from this is that City and the PL want all this to go away and that just about everything will be time barred soon if the PL don’t act very quickly which I don’t think they want to do. There will probably be a deal behind the scenes for a relatively minor punishment to demonstrate that the PL investigation wasn’t all for nothing and to partly appease our red friends.

Lastly Liverpool need a battering today.
 
Cobwebcat said:

You can read about it all on this site and I know the guy posts on BM sometimes too.

I think,in summary, some of the interpretations on this thread are incorrect.

Things that come from the site above as I understand it…

There is a 6 year limitation.

The limitation is from 2016 so runs out at some point this year.

There is no new “evidence” that hasn’t already been looked at by CAS.

It is the site author’s opinion that this has come to the surface again due to the time issue but that there will also be a limit to how much time and money the PL are willing to invest into investigating one of their own stakeholders despite pressure from certain rival clubs.

Its very very unlikely that the original CAS decision will be challenged.

The PL might find some wrong doings re Academy players as other clubs have been punished for.

My own take from this is that City and the PL want all this to go away and that just about everything will be time barred soon if the PL don’t act very quickly which I don’t think they want to do. There will probably be a deal behind the scenes for a relatively minor punishment to demonstrate that the PL investigation wasn’t all for nothing and to partly appease our red friends.

Lastly Liverpool need a battering today.
Click to expand...
City didn’t do a deal with UEFA so it’s unlikely we’ll do a deal now, especially as we’ve done nothing wrong and it’s the same old shite that we appealed at CAS.
 
The time barring element bothers me, the fact this investigation has gone on for so long (years not months) makes me feel they have found nothing to implicate us. Now if the allow this to go on past the time barring limit it will always be held against us regardless of the facts.

You only need to look at the CAS verdict and how that is viewed, ask most non City fans and they will tell you we got of on a technicality rather than what the report actually found.
 
abu13 said:
The time barring element bothers me, the fact this investigation has gone on for so long (years not months) makes me feel they have found nothing to implicate us. Now if the allow this to go on past the time barring limit it will always be held against us regardless of the facts.

You only need to look at the CAS verdict and how that is viewed, ask most non City fans and they will tell you we got of on a technicality rather than what the report actually found.
Click to expand...

Most football fans are idiots, who cares what they think?
 
abu13 said:
The time barring element bothers me, the fact this investigation has gone on for so long (years not months) makes me feel they have found nothing to implicate us. Now if the allow this to go on past the time barring limit it will always be held against us regardless of the facts.

You only need to look at the CAS verdict and how that is viewed, ask most non City fans and they will tell you we got of on a technicality rather than what the report actually found.
Click to expand...
If you spend years studying documents and then you decide that they show no wrong doing at all and so you can't even produce a charge, what is going to be held against us? By whom? To what effect?
 
abu13 said:
The time barring element bothers me, the fact this investigation has gone on for so long (years not months) makes me feel they have found nothing to implicate us. Now if the allow this to go on past the time barring limit it will always be held against us regardless of the facts.

You only need to look at the CAS verdict and how that is viewed, ask most non City fans and they will tell you we got of on a technicality rather than what the report actually found.
Click to expand...
Most football fans just see the fine and presume us guilty of something. They arent interested that the fine was for not dealing with a corrupt uefa. People make their own judgements sometimes
 
Bluesince1979 said:
Most football fans just see the fine and presume us guilty of something. They arent interested that the fine was for not dealing with a corrupt uefa. People make their own judgements sometimes
Click to expand...

I doubt most are able to make a judgment of their own, they follow the narrative set by the press as long as it's convenient. Basically, they accept what they are told to believe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top