They might, they might not. The point I’m really making is that I keep reading the PL will ‘appeal’ if they don’t win. Now that really would be ridiculous. A panel they’ve appointed, listens to the evidence and finds against them and they then appeal? That then really starts to properly look like the witch hunt many people think it is.The PL is basically the hateful 8. So they would like this to drag on
They're not win/win. Dickheads get to be dickheads on social media whatever the result, but if we lose we are significantly derailed: transfer embargoes, points deductions, serious fines, existing sponsorship deals null and void etc etc It'd take at the very, very least five years, if ever, to get back to the level we are at. And in that time the league will rewrite and reshape the rules to make sure that American owners are able to extract money from the UK, from our sports teams, from our match attendance and broadcasting, and from our cities. I fully accept that City are not "the good guys" here, but the consequences of us losing this are fucking terrible for the city of Manchester and Liverpool excluding the pitch those two teams play on. The people up against us have an horrific vision of what they think football should be. I'm not convinced the vision City have is "good" per se, but its a touch less grimmer than the Americans.Whether we clear our name or not, the damage is done and its exactly what was wanted by the other shithouse clubs behind this. Luckily, I and I'm pretty sure the majority of other blues couldn't give a flying fuck what other people think.
Ironically, rags, dips, etc are in a win win situation...we 'lose' they get what they want which is stuck mud, ickle Citeh are cheats etc etc. We 'win', they'll also get what they want which is a Super League. If City destroy the PL in court (this is what I personally believe will happen), its a hop skip and a jump to away days in Milan. PL has been played like a fiddle here.
*rolls eyes*
Sorry but it doesn’t say in x37 you can challenge the result X37 is about a challenge to the awardwell you yourself put it out in your last comment. you are being a bit obtuse on the word "serious". no one is asking you if the whole hearing will take place in the court rather if there are "serious" disputes with the way the panel is handling things. besides disagree with how interpret section 68 of the act.
The rulebook says we can challenge the result under section X.37 which can be seen below.
View attachment 68465
Section 68 of the act:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/23/section/68
Serious irregularity means an irregularity of one or more of the following kinds which the court considers has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant—
(a)failure by the tribunal to comply with section 33 (general duty of tribunal);
(b)the tribunal exceeding its powers (otherwise than by exceeding its substantive jurisdiction: see section 67);
(c)failure by the tribunal to conduct the proceedings in accordance with the procedure agreed by the parties;
(d)failure by the tribunal to deal with all the issues that were put to it;
(e)any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award exceeding its powers;
(f)uncertainty or ambiguity as to the effect of the award;
(g)the award being obtained by fraud or the award or the way in which it was procured being contrary to public policy;
(h)failure to comply with the requirements as to the form of the award; or
(i)any irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings or in the award which is admitted by the tribunal or by any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award.
reading that don't you think if the it will be pretty easy to file a case under 68(a), 68(c), 68(g), 68(i) if say the arbitration panel shafts us by being unfair in the process of examining the evidence, say if they refuse to accept our exculpatory evidence, or if they corruptly make a decision through external pressure, or if they give us a excessive punishment. it clearly says in the act that it is possible to challenge those "serious" issues. so yes you are being obtuse with the word "serious"
Not to mention implying so bias on the part of the Chairman of the tribunal tends to not go down well with the chairman.It's also had a dim view taken of it before by UEFA and CAS.
We shouldn't go down the route of alleged press briefings and any KC being crooked or biased.
It will get us nowhere fast and just come across as muddying the waters.
It makes me legitimately sad that this will never happen.Hope Pep wears all his PL medals on his neck for our next pre-match interview. I'll love to see the so called journalists tear their hair out as he defiantly walk into the room looking like Mr. T
It’s not being an Arsenal ‘fan’ I have a problem with, it’s the fact he is a season card holder. A fan can be many things, like having a team for the sake of it, or a celebrity being given one on soccer am, following the team your family does, many ‘fans’ don’t even follow that particular teams results, it’s just a label for some, there are many instances, but this fella is a SC holder and I doubt it’s just to impress clients. I know it boils down to integrity and so on, but it just feels like the PL are laughing in our faces with this appointment
Agreed. And all of the City board post-2012 will very, very explicitly say they have followed the rules as best they understand them, have not sought to hide anything, that similar clubs do similar things, that there has been a paper trail, that they've sought independent advise etc etc. It'll no doubt be grubby, and they might set a precedence thay we can't do it anymore, but I don't think it'll really be as meaningful as people are hoping.I have a feeling this will come down to letter of the law vs spirit of the law. No evidence of this, just a feeling. I think Man City will have carefully followed the letter of the law but by the sounds of it may come a cropper with the spirit of the law over image rights and the company they sold the rights to (if as reported this was a vehicle for ADUG). Nothing illegal in what they did, but could possibly be considered to be owner funding that shouldn''t count towards FFP.
Remember the fixture well but not the result because we were in the Burnley end getting acquainted with some ruffians named the Suicide Squad.Did we win 1 0 ? , Hendry got dogs abuse ?
This for me is a little twist when these “ Independent Commissions” are appointed there is precedent where the outcome is appealed by the body that set up the commission. Indeed it’s on going at the moment following the issue with the ex Crawley manager.They might, they might not. The point I’m really making is that I keep reading the PL will ‘appeal’ if they don’t win. Now that really would be ridiculous. A panel they’ve appointed, listens to the evidence and finds against them and they then appeal? That then really starts to properly look like the witch hunt many people think it is.
There is a huge dose of mud slinging involved, no doubt. That will derive from the PL probably being pushed, and using these charges in the hope that some of the mud sticks. The other alternative is that the PL believe, supported by their lawyers, that they have substantive and credible evidence in which to initiate proceedings. I feel this latter point, IF true, is the one playing on a few City supporters minds a tad.The club were right to stop co-operating on ongoing matters when charged in 2018. As the charges go up to 2023, what the PL were essentially doing is trying to place us under unprecedented supervisory and special measures. They were asking us to submit paperwork as and when it was being produced. They had absolutely no right to do that because they had no evidence to believe that we were committing offences at the time the charges were brought. As such, I think any charges relating to late 2018-2023 should be easy to dismiss. If the smoking gun is supposedly the Der Spiegel hack, then anything subsequent to that is surely inadmissible. I believe therefore that there is a mud-slinging element to this.
You have to remember that this isn't a legal case so they can appoint whoever they want. There is no requirement to even be impartial because at this point it's the legal equivalent of a disciplinary panel for getting a red card.Share the same view bud. As a SC holder you're actively contributing to a football club financially & commercially rather than just claiming to be a fan of a club.
Whilst I'm sure Rosen is a professional surely his appointment on a panel adds an element of doubt which any defence would be keen to exploit & question. And any prosecution would most likely seek to enter a case with any element of doubt removed to better their case.
I understand our society is littered full of football allegiances, but this isn't a case of Rosen being appointed on a panel where for example Chesterfield or Burton Albion are under scrutiny & being charged.
A historic connection to this subject chase has already been established with Arsenal leading the way initially in writing a letter to Scudmore regarding FPP so anyone in a position of power really shouldn't be associated due to a potential area of conflict.
This is why the use of true and fair by the PL is a mistake imho. For something to affect a true and fair view of the accounts, it must be in the tens of millions, otherwise it's not significant enough. I can't think of anything in that range apart from the Etihad sponsorship. They can't be taking that on, surely? I still think when they talk about true and fair, they are talking about supplementary information, like for example Mancini's AJ salary, rather than the annual accounts themselves. Would be poor terminology, though.it is but taking a £600m turnover company and arguing about the accounting of a £1.8 million payment is ridiculous if you ask me. It's next to nothing in percentage terms
Some good points but can I just point out that there's a world of difference between bending some football rules and committing fraud which is what that wanker Leterne is claimingI suspect the PL, just like UEFA, assume guilt and in all likelihood know we have bent rules. However, knowing (or suspecting) and proving it are very different, you only need to read the comments from the UEFA guy who tried to get us. He’s clearly bitter and frustrated because although he just knew deep inside we were taking the piss, he just couldn’t prove it with the half arsed hacks he had!
The PL are beating the same drum with the same info, they may well know we have trod in to grey areas but proving a rule break is almost impossible for them. City’s owners are not stupid, they are not amateurs and they are well aware of the loopholes and grey areas of FFP (we employed the two gents who wrote the rules!) so it’s fair to assume we have done the same with any PL rules and guidelines in relation to our business.
I fully expect some silly ruling where we are banned from XYZ, fIned huge sums and suffer a points deduction. I then expect City to blow it all apart through the legal system and have it all overturned. It won’t be quick, it won’t be without short term pain and it won’t be pretty… But, I do fully expect us to be vindicated and see the PL have to make a public apology at some point.
On the side, I think we can look forward to some future scandals being “leaked” to the media regarding the PL or ”big clubs”, maybe we’ll see individuals having a bright light on them to the point they have to retire from positions or step down in disgrace. Hey, who knows, we may see leaked hacked emails from other clubs or individuals too. One things for sure, any “revenge” or “payback” will be from the shadows, in the light City will be as professional as is humanly possible but those shadows follow closely behind the light don’t forget.
bang on mate,who gives a shit what other fans think, but worldwide i think we have a lot of respect from fans of other clubs,i recently was was in Dominican and a Boca fan from Argentina wanted my city top to give to his dad, Man City is the topic abroad they love what we have recently achieved, football is as corrupt in other countries as it is here, my guess we have more support taking the PL on and winning than those wanting us stuffed and stitched upThe damage was done before this week, this doesn’t change anything. Personally I could care of other fans or teams think we cheated, fuck them. If we get off then they can say and think what they want, the process will say otherwise and City could in theory then start liable cases if they wanted (I don’t ever think they will, it’s not worth the drama).
It's also had a dim view taken of it before by UEFA and CAS.
We shouldn't go down the route of alleged press briefings and any KC being crooked or biased.
It will get us nowhere fast and just come across as muddying the waters.
we need either Soriano or Khaldoon to do a video interview in they are so confident we are innocent and start dropping in hints of dirt we will release if we indeed do have any? It would be then interesting to see if the media narrative changed from the joy we currently see?