PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off, the more I think about it, the more absurd the notion that the club has systemically and substantially cooked the books becomes.

It would involve a deception on a par with Bernie Madoff, but to involve a much greater conspiracy, in terms of numbers involved. It would also involve incompetence from auditors and banks on a scale similar to the SEC and Bear Stearns in the Madoff case. Logic says the likelihood of all that occurring to be vanishingly small. The serious charges simply make no sense, if logic is applied. There may be a couple of technical breaches, but that would be true of any club.

Conspiracies are notoriously hard to keep going over a sustained period. The bigger, the harder. People fall out, or become aggrieved, or something unforeseeable occurs to move the pieces on the board. Something always happens eventually. The notion this size of conspiracy went on for the period alleged simply doesn’t hold any water.

Something evidential would have come out by now.

 

[terraloon]

It is slightly different to the UEFA non-cooperation charge. City openly admitted to not complying with a bent UEFA investigation carried out in its adjudicatory chamber. This time, however, we have sent everything that was asked of us UNLESS we were advised that the specific items requested by the PL were not relevant to the investigation. This would include everything post-2018.

I find it very interesting that no charges have been brought against us post-2018, except for non-cooperation. This would tell me that outside of the Der Spiegel/hack material and what we have submitted to the PL, they have nothing.

As I said before I am not going( as a Chelsea supporter) comment on the validity or otherwise of the charges but will on process.

I am not sure that City would have any grounds to withhold any documents re finances if requested even if they were thought by City to be irrelevant

Power to Inspect
E.1.
Without prejudice to its powers of inquiry under Rule W.1, the Board either by itself or by any Person appointed by it shall be empowered to inspect the financial records of any Club which it reasonably suspects has acted in breach of these Rules.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It wouldn’t be libellous anyway. It would be Slander :-)

Not if it’s published or broadcast. Slander cases are extremely rare, partly for this reason.

 

[whipper]

Hi all I missed Peps interview on sky yesterday (out on te piss) can anyone let me know what thread and page the full Inter8is on.
Cheers in advance.

City app has it on

 

[remember arthur mann]

Like the rag **** who phone the BBC around 25 years ago and used the phrase "massive club" about 100 times in five minutes.

Think I'll change my name on here to remember arthur albiston(rag fan) and behave like Uriah Heep.

 

[Tanzeylee]

City app has it on

Nice one

 

[not my fault!]

He used him as an example. He said that you would have to ask the CEO's and then stated him as an example. Nothing wrong with that.

I never said there was, but he was naming a CEO who is going after us… And rightly so.

 

[cheekybids]

Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off, the more I think about it, the more absurd the notion that the club has systemically and substantially cooked the books becomes.

It would involve a deception on a par with Bernie Madoff, but to involve a much greater conspiracy, in terms of numbers involved. It would also involve incompetence from auditors and banks on a scale similar to the SEC and Bear Stearns in the Madoff case. Logic says the likelihood of all that occurring to be vanishingly small. The serious charges simply make no sense, if logic is applied. There may be a couple of technical breaches, but that would be true of any club.

Conspiracies are notoriously hard to keep going over a sustained period. The bigger, the harder. People fall out, or become aggrieved, or something unforeseeable occurs to move the pieces on the board. Something always happens eventually. The notion this size of conspiracy went on for the period alleged simply doesn’t hold any water.

Something evidential would have come out by now.

The Madoff doc is fascinating & I imagine City was run like that under Peter Swales.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Hi all I missed Peps interview on sky yesterday (out on te piss) can anyone let me know what thread and page the full Inter8is on.
Cheers in advance.

also linked on p1220

 

[SilverFox2]

I would love Levy to have the balls to call pep out if he is that arsed
Not leak stories to the press
Sue pep you little pussy, you hate spending money any anything so stop threatening spend it on lawyers

I've a feeling that all those that Peps pointed the finger at will be reluctant to take civil action because City may actually have something on them personally.
They all are hiding behind the planned restrictions of PL rules.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The Madoff doc is fascinating & I imagine City was run like that under Peter Swales.

I’ve watched it three times! Incredible story. Truly amazing he got away with it, for as long as he did. So it happens. Enron is another example. But I’ll bet a pound to a pinch of shit that’s not the case here and anyone who thinks it’s likely to have happened is an idiot.

And if anyone cares to raise the issue with me, I will be telling them that. Only a moron would actually believe this is likely to be true.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off, the more I think about it, the more absurd the notion that the club has systemically and substantially cooked the books becomes.

It would involve a deception on a par with Bernie Madoff, but to involve a much greater conspiracy, in terms of numbers involved. It would also involve incompetence from auditors and banks on a scale similar to the SEC and Bear Stearns in the Madoff case. Logic says the likelihood of all that occurring to be vanishingly small. The serious charges simply make no sense, if logic is applied. There may be a couple of technical breaches, but that would be true of any club.

Conspiracies are notoriously hard to keep going over a sustained period. The bigger, the harder. People fall out, or become aggrieved, or something unforeseeable occurs to move the pieces on the board. Something always happens eventually. The notion this size of conspiracy went on for the period alleged simply doesn’t hold any water.

Something evidential would have come out by now.

I keep coming to the same conclusion.

And ultimately the thing that fans want us charged with (related companies pumping money into the club due to social influence) isn't what we are charged with cos it's totally fine. So why would Etihad Airways refuse to pump the money in from their own accounts? Why would their commercial director be like "oh yeah, there's a football team that wants me commit a career ending cooking of the books when I could just actually take up a sponsorship deal that looks decent on my CV". None of it makes sense.

 

[Charlesfarsbar]

Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off, the more I think about it, the more absurd the notion that the club has systemically and substantially cooked the books becomes.

It would involve a deception on a par with Bernie Madoff, but to involve a much greater conspiracy, in terms of numbers involved. It would also involve incompetence from auditors and banks on a scale similar to the SEC and Bear Stearns in the Madoff case. Logic says the likelihood of all that occurring to be vanishingly small. The serious charges simply make no sense, if logic is applied. There may be a couple of technical breaches, but that would be true of any club.

Conspiracies are notoriously hard to keep going over a sustained period. The bigger, the harder. People fall out, or become aggrieved, or something unforeseeable occurs to move the pieces on the board. Something always happens eventually. The notion this size of conspiracy went on for the period alleged simply doesn’t hold any water.

Something evidential would have come out by now.

There are a couple of other examples where a CEO and accounts auditors have colluded to artificially inflate revenues, mainly to increase the companies share price - Enron and World Comm

in both cases it was over a period of a few years not the 15 years we are looking at with city

as you say it’s very unlikely

reading between the lines I think we have been a bit sloppy , especially with some of the internal emails between club execs

but I don’t think there is any evidence of systemic fraud

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I keep coming to the same conclusion.

And ultimately the thing that fans want us charged with (related companies pumping money into the club due to social influence) isn't what we are charged with cos it's totally fine. So why would Etihad Airways refuse to pump the money in from their own accounts? Why would their commercial director be like "oh yeah, there's a football team that wants me commit a career ending cooking of the books when I could just actually take up a sponsorship deal that looks decent on my CV". None of it makes sense.

Exactly. The people involved have too much to lose from being inveigled into a conspiracy like this.

 

[Gogootz]

Ha ha ha , like we care

I think that goes beyond banter tbh, and probably just a taste of what to expect week in week out.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Taking my blue-tinted spectacles off, the more I think about it, the more absurd the notion that the club has systemically and substantially cooked the books becomes.

It would involve a deception on a par with Bernie Madoff, but to involve a much greater conspiracy, in terms of numbers involved. It would also involve incompetence from auditors and banks on a scale similar to the SEC and Bear Stearns in the Madoff case. Logic says the likelihood of all that occurring to be vanishingly small. The serious charges simply make no sense, if logic is applied. There may be a couple of technical breaches, but that would be true of any club.

Conspiracies are notoriously hard to keep going over a sustained period. The bigger, the harder. People fall out, or become aggrieved, or something unforeseeable occurs to move the pieces on the board. Something always happens eventually. The notion this size of conspiracy went on for the period alleged simply doesn’t hold any water.

Something evidential would have come out by now.

The footballing writers being no nowts haven’t picked up on this point. I’ve heard some good input from more qualified people talking about the case this week, that if these allegations are that serious can a small panel of people sit and adjudicate on the vast amount of evidence to go through. Also the astonishing accusation that the club, the directors, accounting firms such as BDO and Deloitte, sponsors and partners such as Silverlake all colluded to commit industrial sized mass fraud for over a decade. It’s a very high bar the Premier League will have to jump over to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Has anyone heard anyone who is legally qualified put out an alternative view to this that generally says City are fucked and the premier league can get all these charges over the line? I’ve not heard one yet.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Has anyone heard anyone who is legally qualified put out an alternative view to this that generally says City are fucked and the premier league can get all these charges over the line? I’ve not heard one yet.

I can think of one, yes…

 

[Jonathan Gunn]

The amount of comments before Pep’s conference that Pep should not be there alone to take the questions. That is why we did. No more perfect response than the manager himself defending our club. Very very powerful and took them all by surprise.

Pep was the outstanding leader he has always been with a fly in his mouth that he wanted to spit out. English isn’t even his first language but brilliantly eloquent.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

I think that goes beyond banter tbh, and probably just a taste of what to expect week in week out.

After about a month it’ll only be in the forefront of the minds of United Liverpool and Arsenal fans.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

As I said before I am not going( as a Chelsea supporter) comment on the validity or otherwise of the charges but will on process.

I am not sure that City would have any grounds to withhold any documents re finances if requested even if they were thought by City to be irrelevant

Power to Inspect
E.1.
Without prejudice to its powers of inquiry under Rule W.1, the Board either by itself or by any Person appointed by it shall be empowered to inspect the financial records of any Club which it reasonably suspects has acted in breach of these Rules.

I think City took the view that some requests were just “fishing expeditions” and I’m sure I read somewhere that the EPL were effectively asking for forecast numbers etc. that paragraph also looks pretty weak to me and capable of wide interpretation (and challenge). City are sensitive on the matter because during the UEFA case the investigative chamber were merrily leaking matters to their placemen in the press (Panja at the New York Times etc). The whole 100+ charges seems more focussed on impact headlines than substantive matters tbh. Maybe City should take a leaf out of the rags book and bury their accounts in an offshore tax haven. As this shitty week has unfolded I’m much more confident that the EPL will live to regret this and have bitten off much more than they can chew. But being a long time blue, you always think something‘s gonna sneak up behind you and kick you up the arse.