PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

The ride never ends.

Is that Roller Coaster Tycoon, by any chance?

Chris Sawyer, Andy Hine and Damon Hill like these posts!!

 

[BrianW]

'It's a pun!' the King added in an offended tone, and everybody laughed, 'Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first—verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

(Alice in Wonderland - and if you read the trial bit, you will see the Premier League were heavily involved.)

 

[slbsn]

It's a point I've made before, but bears repeating. Sponsorship is almost the paradigm example of double entry bookkeeping - you look at the sponsor's accounts and you look at the spondee's accounts. They should match. So far as I know, they do.

So proving that (for instance) the Etihad sponsorship deal was incorrectly presented in our accounts inherently involves the allegation that it was equally incorrectly presented in Etihad's accounts as well - which were independently audited by (IIRC) E & Y. So what is being alleged is not just that City fraudulently concealed the true nature of the payments from our own world-class auditors in our own accounts but that Etihad did the same. (And Etisalat, and Aabar, etc etc...)

It is possible that they have evidence that would demonstrate that this is the case. But it would take some pretty convincing evidence. A lot more convincing that a few emails in Der Spiegel.

Which was basically City's successful argument at CAS

 

[Sir peace frog]

I agree , so why are our emails standing out is all I’m saying .

im not brilliant with tech, but if you had 5 million emails on your data base ,if you typed in the words manchester city in your search tool that would bring up the emails you were looking at, someone has got hold of the guy that hacked all those things and asked him to search for our emails, hes been put up to it, and it wouldn't surprise me if he got paid to do it, be nice in his trial if it came out

 

[BuryBlue1977]

Make of this what you will, but I've just been privy to some startling information that would blow the lid off PGMOL and the power brokers at the Premier League, if it became public. It involves a recording of a conversation between the match day referee and VAR official at a recent away match, a recording that is now in the hands of City.

It's my firm belief that City have compiled a dossier so incendiary, that the Premier League will have no choice but to totally exonerate the Club of any wrongdoing. If they don't, this is going nuclear. Either way, we hold all the cards and this explains why we're so bullish about the eventual outcome. The Premier League are on the back foot, and in my opinion, are currently lobbying the membership as to how best to quietly end the process. I have also been advised that at least one of the "Nasty 9" has had board level discussions with City, distancing themselves from the others in the cabal.

Pep's press conference tells us all we need to know. Watch it again, look at the anger and barely controllable rage in the mans eyes. His attitude wasn't based upon him being reassured about some poxy finances & bullshit charges, it was because he KNOWS exactly what is coming.

Sit back and enjoy the ride Blues.

 

[shemnel]

@M18CTID - appreciate your comments (and the character verification!).

When I was told this yesterday, I reacted in the way most on here have. A mixture of disbelief and laughter if I'm honest. After 40 years of supporting City and hearing every conceivable terrace conspiracy theory known to man, it was going to be filed with the rest, but when it became obvious that the guy I was talking to was deadly serious and there was more to this than a simple conspiracy theory, I started to take an interest. He mentioned a couple of names who could "verify" his claims, one of whom I spoke to and I was told exactly the same thing. I'm also aware that a reasonably well known City twitter account has the same information. I'm not some wet behind the ears snotty-nosed kid, I'm what is commonly known on these pages as an FOC. A typical Mancunian cynic in all things in life, don't seek the limelight and I'm generally apathetic to stuff like this. However, in MY opinion, there is substance to this and anyone who thinks it isn't possible that such a conversation took place (and was recorded) is living in the dark ages.

Anyway, I just want to clarify a couple of things:

There's a very big difference between blackmail and leverage.
The recording wasn't obtained by surreptitious means in any way linked to the Club, whether that be by Middle Eastern special forces, Chinese weather balloons or MI5. It has been handed to the club by a third party.
The intervening "voice" on the recording was not part of the matchday on field team, not a member of the VAR team and not the matchday commander.
The on field referee received an instruction from the intervening voice, who allegedly used the phrase "levelling up".
The "dossier" I mentioned in my original email is my take on things, I have not suggested that the club has one, I'm simply expressing my opinion, although I'd be amazed if they didn't have one.
The club who have distanced themselves from the Nasty 9 is Burnley.

By posting what I did yesterday, I knew I was potentially setting myself up to be a laughing stock, accused of being a raving lunatic, a complete & utter fantasist. My PM's cover all those bases, trust me. Each to their own, I've got broad shoulders. But ask yourself this...why would a perfectly normal, regular Joe City fan, put himself through the ringer like this, if he wasn't confident in the information he was given?

Yes, it could be bullshit, but then again, it could very well be true. There's many, many scandals over the years that were scarcely believable at the time. Scandals that would never have seen the light of day but for the meanderings of some FOC on a faceless platform.

Is football in this country as squeaky clean as they'd have you believe? Yeah....right, sure it is.

The truth will out.

Up the fucking Blues.

you've really doubled down haven't you!!

 

[Chris in London]

Which was basically City's successful argument at CAS

I'm really struggling with the idea that expert opinion evidence would be enough for the PL to succeed on those charges. EG, you put all the papers in the case in front of Deloittes (say) and they say "look at this , this and this, BDO got conned." But BDO say "no we didn't" and E & Y say "we agree with BDO". How can you possibly say the accounts aren't true and fair when two leading firms of accountants say in their opinion that they are? You would be saying that City and Etihad weren't entitled to rely on their own auditors, which is plainly nonsense.

It seems to me these charges needs direct evidence of collusion. I can't see how the PL make a charge of deliberate falsification of the accounts stick unless they have evidence from someone on the inside saying "I know the accounts say X but what actually happened was Y."

That isn't going to happen on the basis of the Der Spiegel emails, so unless the PL have something we don't know about, I'm baffled about why they have made such absolutely devastating accusations with the square root of fuck all to justify them.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Yep, life's short, don't waste one second of it on morons.

This is really great advice. It took me a long time to realise it but it is liberating when you just don't engage with people who are provocative and stupid. The moral high ground is always the best place to be. I haven't mastered it with tailgating fools on the road yet but I am working on it.

 

[Shads]

I agree with this FWIW

Me too.

 

[Chappie]

What is the media saying about the bottles thrown at KDB and what type of fine will arsenal get ?

I'm really struggling with the idea that expert opinion evidence would be enough for the PL to succeed on those charges. EG, you put all the papers in the case in front of Deloittes (say) and they say "look at this , this and this, BDO got conned." But BDO say "no we didn't" and E & Y say "we agree with BDO". How can you possibly say the accounts aren't true and fair when two leading firms of accountants say in their opinion that they are? You would be saying that City and Etihad weren't entitled to rely on their own auditors, which is plainly nonsense.

It seems to me these charges needs direct evidence of collusion. I can't see how the PL make a charge of deliberate falsification of the accounts stick unless they have evidence from someone on the inside saying "I know the accounts say X but what actually happened was Y."

That isn't going to happen on the basis of the Der Spiegel emails, so unless the PL have something we don't know about, I'm baffled about why they have made such absolutely devastating accusations with the square root of fuck all to justify them.

Pressure from a few of there members, maybe a good place to start with.

 

[Shads]

You make a good point. The narrative is set if you say things often enough regardless of what the truth is. The CAS judgment remains a trove of positive and negative detail of the case, City's defence and the result. It is very illuminating especially in respect of City's own submissions against the severe allegations made there but people don't seem to take the time to actually read it.

Understandable though. As City fans and for those of us in the legal field we have a clear Interest In reading it. Most fans of other clubs will not. Let’s face it most of the fans in here relied on us lawyers to read digest and break it down for them. The media will only take whatever out of context quotes suit their agenda, it is likely the only parts of the CAS judgment most fans know about is therefore what the media reports. It will be no different here.

 

[Dribble]

im not brilliant with tech, but if you had 5 million emails on your data base ,if you typed in the words manchester city in your search tool that would bring up the emails you were looking at, someone has got hold of the guy that hacked all those things and asked him to search for our emails, hes been put up to it, and it wouldn't surprise me if he got paid to do it, be nice in his trial if it came out

The other crucial point is whether Pinto was a Robin Hood whistle-blower, or merely a hacker & thief who sold his ill-gotten gains on.

Did Pinto REALLY hack City because he could?

Did Pinto hack City because he was truly concerned about our criminality? If so, why?

OR, did he do it purely for monetary gain? If so, did he hack City to sell-on the data, or was he engaged by a third party to get dirt on City?

 

[wolviedinho]

I'm really struggling with the idea that expert opinion evidence would be enough for the PL to succeed on those charges. EG, you put all the papers in the case in front of Deloittes (say) and they say "look at this , this and this, BDO got conned." But BDO say "no we didn't" and E & Y say "we agree with BDO". How can you possibly say the accounts aren't true and fair when two leading firms of accountants say in their opinion that they are? You would be saying that City and Etihad weren't entitled to rely on their own auditors, which is plainly nonsense.

It seems to me these charges needs direct evidence of collusion. I can't see how the PL make a charge of deliberate falsification of the accounts stick unless they have evidence from someone on the inside saying "I know the accounts say X but what actually happened was Y."

That isn't going to happen on the basis of the Der Spiegel emails, so unless the PL have something we don't know about, I'm baffled about why they have made such absolutely devastating accusations with the square root of fuck all to justify them.

Uefa came after us with a stolen email and packet of pork scratchings. It’s never been about the financial statements. It’s not possible to prove owner disguised investment so instead they go for maximum reputational damage.

 

[Chris in London]

Pressure from a few of there members, maybe a good place to start with.

I'm sure, but even so, making incredibly serious charges that you are almost certain to lose is bizarre behaviour even if the redshirts are baying for it.

 

[Chris in London]

Uefa came after us with a stolen email and packet of pork scratchings. It’s never been about the financial statements. It’s not possible to prove owner disguised investment so instead they go for maximum reputational damage.

The accusations the PL are making are massively more serious than the accusations UEFA made.

Making incredibly serious allegations they are highly unlikely to prove is more likely to backfire

 

[wolviedinho]

The accusations the PL are making are massively more serious than the accusations UEFA made.

Making incredibly serious allegations they are highly unlikely to prove is more likely to backfire

Will it backfire? Nothing will come of it apart from Gary Neville telling us we need a regulator and Sky reporting we got off due to lack of evidence.

It should be treated as a very serious matter and in any other profession it would be. However, this is football and the cartel league.

The smoking gun, would it need to be disclosed before the tribunal begins? Or is that only in an actual real court case and not this pantomime?

 

[SilverFox2]

I‘ve heard latest AI software that can sing or speak with whatever you program it to do but it’s far from mimicking real human voice. This the most extreme you can go atm . Also logically there’ll be a night and day difference in background noise unless both parties are at the same room and space. You can easily see that in oscilloscope .

Aside from the recording and it's content I have to say that voice recognition is used as ultimate confirmation of a person's logon by one of the High Street Banks. Not sure if it is Natwest or Halifax.

 

[dario2739]

I'm really struggling with the idea that expert opinion evidence would be enough for the PL to succeed on those charges. EG, you put all the papers in the case in front of Deloittes (say) and they say "look at this , this and this, BDO got conned." But BDO say "no we didn't" and E & Y say "we agree with BDO". How can you possibly say the accounts aren't true and fair when two leading firms of accountants say in their opinion that they are? You would be saying that City and Etihad weren't entitled to rely on their own auditors, which is plainly nonsense.

It seems to me these charges needs direct evidence of collusion. I can't see how the PL make a charge of deliberate falsification of the accounts stick unless they have evidence from someone on the inside saying "I know the accounts say X but what actually happened was Y."

That isn't going to happen on the basis of the Der Spiegel emails, so unless the PL have something we don't know about, I'm baffled about why they have made such absolutely devastating accusations with the square root of fuck all to justify them.

To me - this carries a bigger implication... that being that if City had done this, and the PL haven't spotted it... who's to say that other clubs haven't done it too... for me, every other club should now have to be investigated in the same manner.

 

[dadnlad]

cockfosters station after last nights game there was a bunch of city fans singing and joyful one song we'll cheat when we want to lots of laughter some arsenal fans started shouting comments to which another arsenal fan shut them up and said city just doing what every club even we have done and good luck to them,he was met with little muttering but most agreed with him

 

[Shads]

No. In essence it resets the time to file the claim. Otherwise, you could get away with things by dishonestly concealing them long enough. It is a high hurdle to prove dishonest concealment though

There is also an interesting argument that as the der spiegel leaks were on Dec 2016 and more in Nov 18. When the specific emails they seek to rely on came out is hugely important. If they came out in the Dec 2016 release the PL only had until Dec 2022 to file the charges and are therefore out of time.
I think a strong argument can also be made that if there is no legitimate further relevant documentation than the accounts (ie we show once again that the leaked emails are doctored and irrelevant) then the trigger date is the filing of those accounts.