PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[1974Blue]

Inside Info that is always wrong. How did you get access to a computer on a psych ward?

Keep that inside info, inside your head -:)

I'm confused, I thought it came from his arse? Are his head and arse the same thing? Not asking for a friend;-)

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Oh come on ffs. You have got to be kidding?

I’d be like if a robber commits a crime and gets arrested for it without much evidence but then the people who grassed him up fancied doing a robbery too, so those in power, who were the grasses mates, quickly changed the law to make it legal in order to suit the grasses.

Perfectly fair because the robber broke the law but the latter didn’t right? Absolutely reasonable behaviour. You can’t pick and choose when laws stand or exist in order to suit an agenda.

Although he’s undoubtedly a horrible bastard, he can legitimately say what he’s said. In 1861 the locomotive act introduced a 10 MPH with the red flag act subsequently reducing that to 4 MPH in the country and 2 MPH in town. Following much lobbying the speed limit was increased to 14 and then 20 MPH before, in 1930, all speed limits for cars were abolished. So, you could have broken the law, from 1861 to 1930 whilst believing that there should actually be no speed limits!

 

[KS55]

Putting like would have been cruel there. I feel for you @KS55 . It’s the pits when the team need us!! ;-)
Sorry, being serious I really do feel for you. Trying to fight it seems to get us nowhere but we just keep on keeping on. :-)
I’m noticing it even more with all this sunshine as it is showing up the dust around the house! :-)
If I’m not invading your personal space I send you love and gentle hugs. :-)

Don’t worry about the dust. After three months it doesn’t get any thicker.

 

[schfc6]

He's against City because he thinks we broke the rules. The rules he (presumably) was having to run his club by during the same period. He's got good reason to think we broke the rules as well, the emails look damning, the PL has enough evidence to charge us.

That's why this judicial process is important to everyone.

Not to disagree with you, but didn’t Quinn confirm that the FFP that they were asked to vote on was not the same as the FFP that got announced. The original being primarily about limiting debt and things like Barca are doing now as opposed to the stop City FFP they announced.

Original FFP was supposed designed to stop the Leeds/Pompey model. But we got an FFP that actively encouraged debt and leveraged finance as opposed to encouraging investment.

 

[blueparrot]

Maybe, but that's very different to 80k ph...

Obviously isn't 80k /hr but really nobody has a clue, especially not the media.

 

[halfcenturyup]

They aren't known in detail though. Matt Lawton is one of the better commentators on financial stuff but he's just guessing, as we all are.

There is stuff about sponsorship in those charges but they're a subset of the overall group of charges around our accounts. It looks to me like the PL are going back to the period that was time-barred, as well as the period that wasn't. But I also think it involves the image rights payment issue, when these were paid by Fordham, rather than the club directly.

But that's speculation; we don't know the detail.

What he said.

 

[paska]

Problem is,we probably did,as we were in the league when it was formed in 1992............................unfortunately

We were, but that move was led by the clubs at the top, which we simply weren’t one of at that time. Everyone else *had* to agree, I.e. not so willingly.

The formation of the EPL was also just one part of the picture. It was the beginning, but there’s a difference between a restructured top-flight and what we have now as mentioned in my last comment

In fact, the ones who led that decision are the very same clubs who formed the cartel

 

[Matt Diablo]

I said after a few days this shitstorm would disappear and it looks like it has. Just one story now on the fail site below the fifteen on the rags game obviously. We might hear nothing now for another couple of seasons, bigger things to worry about until then. Chill everyone!

Deffo think the scum writers/ reporters have been told to he very careful what they say now

 

[blueju]

not gonna be any development on this for some time imo. tomorrow we will see Pep front of the press, his mood will be only thing to watch as I assume (hopefully) our press officer will make it clear no questions can be asked about or related to this ongoing case and fake charges. and anyone who does try to put Pep in a situation will be fucking dealt by Ricky Hatton on the spot and will never be invited back for pressers.
(I know, we are too nice for that, probably the opposite, VIP treatment next time...)

That’s funny, I was daydreaming today at work about Ricky paying a visit to the press box during a game and slamming a few dickheads words back down their throats, about ten years worth.

 

[KS55]

I suspect it'll be brought up again just before and during every single transfer window until a resolution.

“How can cheating City afford Haaland? He cost £200 m., you know. Mind you he’s half the player Nunez is”

 

[domalino]

Not to disagree with you, but didn’t Quinn confirm that the FFP that they were asked to vote on was not the same as the FFP that got announced. The original being primarily about limiting debt and things like Barca are doing now as opposed to the stop City FFP they announced.

Original FFP was supposed designed to stop the Leeds/Pompey model. But we got an FFP that actively encouraged debt and leveraged finance as opposed to encouraging investment.

If there were any significant changes they'd have had to vote again.

 

[HelloCity]

They aren't known in detail though. Matt Lawton is one of the better commentators on financial stuff but he's just guessing, as we all are.

There is stuff about sponsorship in those charges but they're a subset of the overall group of charges around our accounts. It looks to me like the PL are going back to the period that was time-barred, as well as the period that wasn't. But I also think it involves the image rights payment issue, when these were paid by Fordham, rather than the club directly.

But that's speculation; we don't know the detail.

Will City know the details?

 

[paska]

I couldnt see us keeping say haaland against his will forcing him to play him league 2.

I’m assuming it would be the EFL Championship, and I didn’t claim we’d keep hold of every single player.

However, we absolutely could keep a decent number on in the Championship for one season, blitz the points and GD records to bounce straight back up.

Maybe Haaland, maybe not. It would be a call for the club to make. Be easier to convince players with an emotional connection though, such as the man himself

 

[JewelZee]

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,

Everything you say we've done is true. Why do we need to try to convince a biased, hostile media to "brag" on our behalf? That would be a monumental waste of time and frankly not something I as a supporter would ever want the club to do. Our actions speak for themselves. People will believe what they want. We do our talking through our actions both on and off the field in doing the things you stated. That's more than enough for me. You may feel differently and that's OK with me. Me, I don't want a fucking thing from these low life scumbags passing themselves off as some type of news providers and/or subject matter experts (fucking hysterical). At this point it's better to watch them repeatedly choke on their own words and to watch their heads explode every time we win another piece of silverware.

 

[nijinsky69]

It’s been three days since the PL charges and I’m already finding the whole thing pretty draining. Not spending the next three years (potentially) fretting until a judgement is actually made. Fuck that! It’s no good for my mental health for a start. Just want to get back to enjoying football, or at least trying to, again.

Still think that we’ll ultimately prevail again, as at CAS, and that talk of relegation, losing titles etc is fanciful. Fans of other clubs and certain journalists are getting giddy, and things seem grim at the moment, but the story will drift away in the minds of most over the coming weeks and months.

With no immediate threat to the club’s future, I hope we go absolutely balls out in the coming transfer windows and add more trophies to our cabinet. Demonstrate that we’re not going away anytime soon, despite what they wish.

Totally agree with this. The giddiness from the morons will dissipate with time as the news vaccuum and boredom sets in. The non-cooperation stuff feels like our biggest threat as it’s such an easy/imprecise allegation to lay at our door. I mean how do you quantify non-cooperation? It’s hugely subjective.

 

[M18CTID]

He's against City because he thinks we broke the rules. The rules he (presumably) was having to run his club by during the same period. He's got good reason to think we broke the rules as well, the emails look damning, the PL has enough evidence to charge us.

That's why this judicial process is important to everyone.

The same e-mails that we successfully challenged at CAS? Or did the prick miss that?

 

[Matt Diablo]

Fuk I love this guy

 

[domalino]

I doubt it'd be a problem, with a judgement potentially 3-4 years away. We'll just have to insert a clause into any contracts saying that players will be allowed to leave if, and it's a big if, we are found guilty.

I still can't quite believe this timeline.

It made sense when Stefan was talking about appeals going up to the high courts, but for a PL panel? It just doesn't really hold up.

I don't think it can be overstated how bad it would look for the Premier League to be in 2027 arguing about things that happened in 2008 from an investigation that started in 2018.

 

[paska]

If there were any significant changes they'd have had to vote again.

In an ideal world

 

[bitterblue78]

I’m assuming it would be the EFL Championship, and I didn’t claim we’d keep hold of every single player.

However, we absolutely could keep a decent number on in the Championship for one season, blitz the points and GD records to bounce straight back up.

Maybe Haaland, maybe not. It would be a call for the club to make. Be easier to convince players with an emotional connection though, such as the man himself

IF we were expelled then we would have to apply to join the football league so it would be league 2