PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Keeper! said:
Agreed, if guilty on the serious charges we will be certainly relegated, losing titles is just hyperbole.
Click to expand...

FoR3Bp5WYAAUhkw


Does not give panel power to remove titles or points in the past.

They can ask for a replay but how do you replay 9 years worth of games?
 
Keeper! said:
Paying Mancini off the books and paying sponsorship ourselves via a "third party"

The other charges are meaningless in the overall context.

Do they have hacked evidence to show we were lying? That I would imagine even we don't know (?)
Click to expand...

I am not overly concerned by any i⁰f those.

I am sure there will be contracts showing that City weren't paying Mancini "off the books". Even if the cash was paid by City, that doesn't prove anything about who the services were provided to. And even if we were using AJ to pay part of Mancini's salary, there was no FFP, so there was no actual damage done, other than a technicality. It's really not a serious issue. It certainly doesn't stop the annual accounts giving a true and fair view for those worrying about that.

We have defended the sponsorship issues before, other than ADTA and Aabar, which were small. I am sure we can do so again. And again, the contracts are properly recorded in the annual accounts, the services were supplied and amounts settled in full. Not really anything that affects the true and fair view given by the annual accounts, even if ADUG settled them all directly on behalf of the sponsors as long as the underlying accounting was proper.

As for new evidence, I find it hard to believe there are smoking gun emails lying around that haven't been made public in the last four years. And even if there were, emails prove nothing other than discussions, maybe instructions. What actually happens in the accounting is the only important thing. And I doubt anyone apart from City and related parties have access to that. Occam's Razor tells me they don't have much.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I am not overly concerned by any i⁰f those.

I am sure there will be contracts showing that City weren't paying Mancini "off the books". Even if the cash was paid by City, that doesn't prove anything about who the services were provided to. And even if we were using AJ to pay part of Mancini's salary, there was no FFP, so there was no actual damage done, other than a technicality. It's really not a serious issue. It certainly doesn't stop the annual accounts giving a true and fair view for those worrying about that.

We have defended the sponsorship issues before, other than ADTA and Aabar, which were small. I am sure we can do so again. And again, the contracts are properly recorded in the annual accounts, the services were supplied and amounts settled in full. Not really anything that affects the true and fair view given by the annual accounts, even if ADUG settled them all directly on behalf of the sponsors as long as the underlying accounting was proper.

As for new evidence, I find it hard to believe there are smoking gun emails lying around that haven't been made public in the last four years. And even if there were, emails prove nothing other than discussions, maybe instructions. What actually happens in the accounting is the only important thing. And I doubt anyone apart from City and related parties have access to that. Occam's Razor tells me they don't have much.
Click to expand...
"I am not overly concerned by any i⁰f those"

Maybe you should be!
 
I can only assume that the Premier League have an informant from within the club, whether it be a former backroom staff member, player etc that can back up their charges against the club.

I cannot believe they can prove any of the charges they have levied against us other than the “Noncooperation” without such a back up.
This might explain why the normal inspection of our accounts each year were passed.

If this scenario exists - then it adds more credence to their charges and City will need to discredit such evidence.
 
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
Am I missing something here?
This from the BBC website
""First, accusations that Manchester City have artificially inflated the money coming into the club, with particular respect to commercial and sponsorship deals. The Premier League appears to be claiming the money was actually coming from the club owner, which doesn't count towards FFP (financial fair play), but was being disguised as sponsorship income, which does count towards FFP."

Surely if the money was coming from City's owner, which WAS permitted for FFP reasons, why would City instead claim it was sponsorship money that was not permitted under FFP?
Click to expand...
Isn’t this the old “related parties” argument where Intl Accounting Standards define the term and that’s what we abided by but the Prem can say, “Well, WE say they’re related” and hit us? Or am I confusing it?
 
Keeper! said:
Well maybe we should , if we are innocent and I believe we are, why have we stayed silent?

Have we not transformed the professionalism of the way football is run?

Have we transformed the way the games is played?

Have we transformed one of England's great clubs?

Have we transformed a run down, inner city area of Manchester?

Have we given employment to hundreds of local unemployed people in the rebuilding of this club and it's
infrastructure?

Have we played a major part in making the Premier League one of the most valuable and most recognized brands in the world?

I would say the answer to all the above is YES and a big YES.

So why have we stayed so passive, so meek amongst all the rumor's and allegations, that's the one major worry that's in the back of my mind,
Click to expand...
I assume because our lawyers say that’s the smartest thing to do. Plus I recall our protest but acceptance of the goalpost-moving violation — City took a relatively manageable punishment vs. escalating the big enchilada. I don’t know that we’ll bring out nuclear weaponry if we feel jobbed by the ruling this time but certainly the chances must be higher since the stakes probably are.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
I assume because our lawyers say that’s the smartest thing to do. Plus I recall our protest but acceptance of the goalpost-moving violation — City took a relatively manageable punishment vs. escalating the big enchilada. I don’t know that we’ll bring out nuclear weaponry if we feel jobbed by the ruling this time but certainly the chances must be higher since the stakes probably are.
Click to expand...
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
I assume because our lawyers say that’s the smartest thing to do. Plus I recall our protest but acceptance of the goalpost-moving violation — City took a relatively manageable punishment vs. escalating the big enchilada. I don’t know that we’ll bring out nuclear weaponry if we feel jobbed by the ruling this time but certainly the chances must be higher since the stakes probably are.
Click to expand...
We made a quick response and it was well crafted one that goes well beyond the Royal Family edict.

Little point getting the media doing little more than the usual sound biting and its worked well so far beyond the City haters.

Here in Oz there was some reporting along the lines of the biggest scandal to hit the Premiership if not world sport on day one in fact it was the third item on some stations next to the Earth quake in Turkey/ Syria and the State of the Union address from an overseas perspective.

I assume its pretty low key already in the US Fog as it should be.
 
Keeper! said:
"I am not overly concerned by any i⁰f those"

Maybe you should be!
Click to expand...

:) I suppose we will see.

But in the meantime, I think it would be useful if the posters with more experience in some of these things were more level-headed about our prospects.

The number of people who aren't so experienced who are going crazy about the charges and our punishments are looking for some re-assurance, and it isn't helped by glass-half empty analysis. I really think our glass is half-full, if not actually overflowing, and am happy to put that point of view across.
 
halfcenturyup said:
:) I suppose we will see.

But in the meantime, I think it would be useful if the posters with more experience in some of these things were more level-headed about our prospects.

The number of people who aren't so experienced who are going crazy about the charges and our punishments are looking for some re-assurance, and it isn't helped by glass-half empty analysis. I really think our glass is half-full, if not actually overflowing, and am happy to put that point of view across.rflowing, and am happy to put that point of view across.
Click to expand...
This is a forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think a lot of people on here are not aware how serious some of these charges are and the consequences IF we are ultimately found guilty.

This , again in my opinion, has gone way past certain "historical" clubs and jealousy.

By taking this huge step, the Premier League have passed the point of no return, and if they have made a huge error in judgment they are legally screwed and it will cost them 100s of millions in damages because our "brand" has suffered a huge damaging blow, and that is fact.
 
Stefan made some very interesting points in his latest podcast.

Firstly, it’s inexplicable, given the time frames, that we could not sit down in a room with the boffins in the PL and not arrive at some sort of deal that saved the face of both parties, and saved millions and millions in the process.

Secondly, given the magnitude, gravity and complexity of the allegations, and everything that this sort of case brings with it in terms of evidence and witnesses, a 3 member PL panel is completely ill-equipped to deal with the demands of such a case.

Thirdly, and very importantly, if (and I emphasise if) we are found to have falsified information, then the biggest losers are we, the diehard fans. Our Board has stewardship over the management of the club. They owe a duty to us to manage the affairs of City in a manner that ensures we, as fans, can enjoy the fruits of their labour.

When I consider all of this, I’m not normally a conspiracy theorist. I don’t believe that Michael Jackson and Elvis are hanging out in some dark dingy bar in Tennessee.

However, the timing of this announcement, the manner in which was announced (complete with journalist tipoff), the vague sweeping nature of the charges, and the nature of the current leadership of the PL, leads me to a conclusion that we have been well and truly set up.
 
Keeper! said:
This is a forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think a lot of people on here are not aware how serious some of these charges are and the consequences IF we are ultimately found guilty.

This , again in my opinion, has gone way past certain "historical" clubs and jealousy.

By taking this huge step, the Premier League have passed the point of no return, and if they have made a huge error in judgment they are legally screwed and it will cost them 100s of millions in damages because our "brand" has suffered a huge damaging blow, and that is fact.
Click to expand...
Lets be honest, we will never be innocent in the eyes of the media and most people, if we get off it will be because we had 240,000 lawyers or we bought people off.
 
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