PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[ScottSinclair]

We had one. A big gambler who accumulated debts owed to some very dodgy people. City were convinced he was match-fixing and even went to the police. It's absolutely not just lower league players.

Joey Barton surely? Got banned during his Burnley days. Vaguely remember him saying he put money on Samaras not to score

 

[117 M34]

Joey Barton surely? Got banned during his Burnley days. Vaguely remember him saying he put money on Samaras not to score

Bet he won a fortune

 

[Gordyola]

That article shows how bent it is , it’s an absolute disgrace tbh , City are generally that good though we don’t often need pens to win a game , how on earth did that Rashford goal not go to VAR ? Some proper shady shit going on 100%

All goals, possible pens are checked by VAR for offside, fouls or handball so, it went to VAR who confirmed he was in an offside position, that like a lino is the extent of their involvement. Atwell was aware that Rashford didn't touch the ball he may well have asked Oliver to confirm and we saw him to to McCann, this gave him the opportunity to decide to allow the goal, it was his decision.

 

[ScottSinclair]

Bet he won a fortune

Yeah can't really blame him

 

[its grim up north]

If you have a top secret dossier full of kompromat, you don't wait until you've been very publicly charged with 115 offences and had your reputation destroyed in the media before using it.

Not unless you want to show up what type of people and organisations you are dealing with. And let people know how we are being attacked.

 

[Gordyola]

As the FootballIsFixed guy has posted the information in his blog, I'll go live on it.

Among the information he passed on was that a number of people reporting to LFC were working in our Performance & Analytics team. My understanding is that a number of people were sacked soon afterwards. I also believe there was a 'war room' at Liverpool's HQ where these activities were coordinated from. However I believe we were already aware of this.

That's why I was so convinced something major would happen. I couldn't see how this wouldn't be a major scandal. But for whatever reason it's been 4 years and nothing. At least not yet.

If you own a £3B asset would it make sense to bring down the organisation that it depends upon?

 

[Norman kneejerk]

We w also been compensated

If they’re capable of planting spies in our own camp and hacking our scouting database, what’s the chances of them paying some Portuguese hacker to get into our emails and leak them to the world? I’m not making accusations, but..

I thought that.
Chances of him chosing city of all the organisations in the world...? Someones got to be on on that.

 

[halfcenturyup]

If you own a £3B asset would it make sense to bring down the organisation that it depends upon?

No-one is going to bring the PL down, but it could help to get the club's position strengthened and the reforms needed. How do you think Al-Khalaifi got his position at UEFA? Charm and pesonality? This could be OUR way of buying a seat at the table.

 

[Gordyola]

Oliver has got away scot-free from the Fernandez goal. He surely knew that that goal shouldn't have counted. At minimum, he should have recommended a referral to the monitor.

Cann has also come away from this totally unscathed. When Fernandez remonstrated about the offside flag, Cann said something to him that made him go away with a smile on his face. Possibly "Don't worry, you'll get the goal. I'll confirm Rashford didn't touch the ball".

As an experienced linesmen, Cann should have told Attwell that there was definite interference with the City players. Also that he didn't think there was a touch by Rashford, because he couldn't possibly say definitively that there was no touch, because at one point Akanji was between him and Rashford. So he should have recommended a review.

Hate to defend Oliver and McCann but its not the way that VAR works. Yes, i guess Oliver could have advised Atwell that it was ridiculous to suggest that Rashford wasnt interfering with play but as a VAR that's beyond his power. What would going to a monitor prove? Rashford was in an offside position and it was clear he never touched the ball The decision was Atwell's, McCann may have told the rag that it was going to be allowed because he was part of the radio communications and he knew that Atwell was only coming to him as a a show
The offside interpretation will be quietly changed to say if a player is in playing distance they are interfering with play

 

[dubblue]

A lot of straw clutching going on. I find it impossible to believe with all being thrown at us for a decade or so, that we have just taken every bit of criticism while sitting on all this.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

A lot of straw clutching going on. I find it impossible to believe with all being thrown at us for a decade or so, that we have just taken every bit of criticism while sitting on all this.

If you hadn't noticed - we've previously been relying on a different approach. Which has either backfired spectacularly, or, we may have even been facing more charges.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Hate to defend Oliver and McCann but its not the way that VAR works. Yes, i guess Oliver could have advised Atwell that it was ridiculous to suggest that Rashford wasnt interfering with play but as a VAR that's beyond his power. What would going to a monitor prove? Rashford was in an offside position and it was clear he never touched the ball The decision was Atwell's, McCann may have told the rag that it was going to be allowed because he was part of the radio communications and he knew that Atwell was only coming to him as a a show
The offside interpretation will be quietly changed to say if a player is in playing distance they are interfering with play

Still makes me fucking angry, that decision. The bastards.

Actually, Oliver could have told Atwell to review it on the monitor, but I suppose he was wary of Webb's new rule (mid-way through the season, mind) that referees' judgements shouldn't be questioned. What a farce.

 

[halfcenturyup]

A lot of straw clutching going on. I find it impossible to believe with all being thrown at us for a decade or so, that we have just taken every bit of criticism while sitting on all this.

So do I, really, but timing is everything.

 

[KS55]

And why they seem to be going through recruitment guys for fun, Michael Edwards quit & his successor followed 6 months later, as well as a few guys that worked under them. This has all been dressed as him taking an extended break from football and he even turned down the Chelsea role, maybe he is just an exhausted 41 year old ?

No peds for the execs.

 

[Gingers Dad]

He wasn't shit, they have hinted and hinted before but won't name him or the actual proof.
He is their #1 target for match fixing.

He wasn't shit?

 

[slbsn]

The PL charges will be tried on their merits. All this other conspiracy, Liverpool, VAR, blah blah blah nonsense EVEN IF TRUE, won't make a blind bit of difference. You really think 2 KCs are going to focus on a bit of a recording about a completely unrelated matter that also PROVES nothing?

Believe it if you like but either way it is a sideshow.

 

[meltonblue]

We had one. A big gambler who accumulated debts owed to some very dodgy people. City were convinced he was match-fixing and even went to the police. It's absolutely not just lower league players.

It wasn’t Ederson betting on himself to get a yellow card in the first half the other night was it…? ;)

 

[bluealf]

He wasn't shit?

I would say we are talking about different people the clue would be in the number I used.

He was the favourite player to be accused of fixing before he left us, though no proof as ever been produced.

 

[Winchester]

Come on Lord Pannik

 

[ArdwickAlbert]

From the trollograph….some prick called alan tyers….



‘Pannick on the streets of London’, read the banner at Manchester City; a pretty good joke that repoints a lyric from The Smiths to pay tribute to Lord Pannick, who will be representing the club vs the Premier League as they do battle against allegations that they have breached its financial rules.

Time was when fan banners lauded goalscorers and midfield generals and it’s not hard to see why some people find it a bit ridiculous that football fans are lionising a man whose career path into City’s affections was less “youth team and then a loan move to Girona before breaking into the Carabao Cup squad” and more “Hertford College Oxford, called to the Bar, and then appointed a crossbench peer in the House of Lords”. But we are where we are and given that City's solitary acquisition in the January transfer window was 20-year-old Maximo Perrone for the chump-change sum of eight million quid, you can understand why the faithful are desperate to welcome a new hero.

A hard-tackling but cultured legal mind equally adept on the left or the right, Panno – as he is surely known to the lads in the City dressing room – has had previous spells with the Sunday Times in the Spycatcher case, representing kink-shamed fash scion Max Mosley in the European Court of Human Rights, and more recently an appearance on behalf of Isis banter queen Shamima Begum in the Supreme Court.

There’s a bit of any irony about having a go at fans for taking an interest in events off the pitch. Remember the days when football journaltics talked about football only, now they are geopolitical experts who never reference the game.