PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

domalino said:
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.
Click to expand...
I can't make sense of this timeline either. It seems to have arisen in people's minds in the mistaken belief that this matter could be contested through the courts and/or that because the investigation took years, the adjudication will as well neither of which is right.

That said, while I haven't read all of the stuff on this thread, I don't recall seeing anyone picking up on what I find a bit strange in the City statement:

“The Club welcomes the review of this matter by an independent Commission, to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position".

What and where is this body of irrefutable evidence? Is this something that the PL have and which they don't think is irrefutable so they've proceeded with the charges? Or is it other evidence that City possess but have not provided to the PL but maybe were going to do if the apparently sudden decision to publicise the charges hadn't pre-empted it? If I recall City have a bit of form during the CAS thing where I got the impression they weren't exactly as forthcoming with information as they might have been (maybe because of tactics) and is the same thing happening here?

I also have a recollection (perhaps wrong) that City made mention of "irrefutable evidence" in the CAS case. Not sure if anyone remembers this?
 
Dodge said:
My good friend Simon Hill, who is still fighting the good City fight in Oz, sent me this brilliant letter, which was published in an Australian newspaper yesterday.


Dear Sirs,

Whatever the outcome of the legal battle between Man City and the Premier League, we should not lose sight of the risible rules that govern football investment ("Man City facing relegation for 115 breaches of rules, Feb 7"). The case for a regulator has been made on the basis that asset stripping owners must be stopped from ruining clubs and communities. Yet, in Manchester, we have two models.

At Manchester United, owners have championed extractive investment on an industrial scale, with a leveraged buyout and no investment in the ground, facilities or training - never mind the locality or community.

At Manchester City, the owners have spent their own money, not just on the club and players but on a whole infrastructure, which has transformed East Manchester and extended well beyond football.

The Premier League is oblivious to the first model and desperate to stop the second. I hope City win its case, but whatever the upshot there is something deeply wrong about the governance of football.

Alun Francis
Manchester.


Alun - whoever you are, I salute you.
Click to expand...
thats from the Times yesterday.
FoeDjXKaYAEVI7M.jpeg
 
halfcenturyup said:
Nobody knows.
Click to expand...
vicblueman said:
Ducker from the telegraph saying the premier league independent commission do not have the power to relegate City.
They have the power for Expulsion ,points deduction or fine .
If expelled we would have to apply to join the football league 2 ,he goes on to say they could refuse us .
Click to expand...
Pointless conjecture from Ducker with maybe a bit of wishful thinking. No way would we get expelled for historic misdemeanours. Decent click bait I suppose.
 
Sky reporting on the new plans for a European Super League and Spunkbubble Solhekol stating it`s selfish and all based on greed. You 2 faced twat, you`ve been banging on about MCFC being guilty over the past few days of breaches of Premier League rules, the same rules that are also based upon a "selfish and greedy" cartel.






NB - the term Spunkbubble used with L.Gallagher`s permission
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Good question. It seems like, initially, we only knew what the PL published. But we'd have to know the specifics to enable us to mount a defence.
Click to expand...

Surely soon as well. I know it's not court, but can you imagine an accused person only finding out last minute or when they turn up for trial specifically what they're alleged to have done wrong? The defence should know exactly what the prosecution are going to present and the angle they will take.
 
Can anyone remember City’s reasoning for not cooperating with UEFA? From memory there were concerns about leaks to the press, in particular through a journalist called Tariq Panja at the NYT but I can’t remember why these leaks were damaging, i.e how the information was used, and the specific reasons City refused to cooperate.

I guess the reason I am asking is I am sure there will be similar reasons for not cooperating with the PL. What other reasons would City have for not sharing information?
 
City Man said:
I can't make sense of this timeline either. It seems to have arisen in people's minds in the mistaken belief that this matter could be contested through the courts and/or that because the investigation took years, the adjudication will as well neither of which is right.

That said, while I haven't read all of the stuff on this thread, I don't recall seeing anyone picking up on what I find a bit strange in the City statement:

“The Club welcomes the review of this matter by an independent Commission, to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position".

What and where is this body of irrefutable evidence? Is this something that the PL have and which they don't think is irrefutable so they've proceeded with the charges? Or is it other evidence that City possess but have not provided to the PL but maybe were going to do if the apparently sudden decision to publicise the charges hadn't pre-empted it? If I recall City have a bit of form during the CAS thing where I got the impression they weren't exactly as forthcoming with information as they might have been (maybe because of tactics) and is the same thing happening here?

I also have a recollection (perhaps wrong) that City made mention of "irrefutable evidence" in the CAS case. Not sure if anyone remembers this?
Click to expand...
they did, at least a couple of times.
 
vicblueman said:
Ducker from the telegraph saying the premier league independent commission do not have the power to relegate City.
They have the power for Expulsion ,points deduction or fine .
If expelled we would have to apply to join the football league 2 ,he goes on to say they could refuse us .
Click to expand...
What, utd fan ducker wishing us all the best and sounding like a bitter little prick?
He's loving it, i've never seen utd fans as happy, for the last 18 months they've hated football and thrown the towel in more times than Rockys corner.

Let them take the piss, let them have their fun in the sun, it'll be for nothing in the end.
 
City Man said:
I can't make sense of this timeline either. It seems to have arisen in people's minds in the mistaken belief that this matter could be contested through the courts and/or that because the investigation took years, the adjudication will as well neither of which is right.

That said, while I haven't read all of the stuff on this thread, I don't recall seeing anyone picking up on what I find a bit strange in the City statement:

“The Club welcomes the review of this matter by an independent Commission, to impartially consider the comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position".

What and where is this body of irrefutable evidence? Is this something that the PL have and which they don't think is irrefutable so they've proceeded with the charges? Or is it other evidence that City possess but have not provided to the PL but maybe were going to do if the apparently sudden decision to publicise the charges hadn't pre-empted it? If I recall City have a bit of form during the CAS thing where I got the impression they weren't exactly as forthcoming with information as they might have been (maybe because of tactics) and is the same thing happening here?

I also have a recollection (perhaps wrong) that City made mention of "irrefutable evidence" in the CAS case. Not sure if anyone remembers this?
Click to expand...
I've no idea how much "irrefutable evidence" we've made available to the PL but given that they've chucked in all the charges that UEFA had us up on - and we successfully appealed against - I'd imagine that for those charges at least, we'll have presented that exact same evidence (that CAS deemed more than good enough) to the PL. Outside of those charges though, I've no idea how much or how little evidence we've put forward so far.
 
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