PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Someone has questioned me about the idea of the Gang of Four, however the historical evidence of their concerted attack on City is well documented. Don't forget the CEO of MUFC left his role to join UEFA with the specific intention of creating rules targeted at City, he actually stated that in an interview !!!

www.theguardian.com

Manchester United's David Gill elected to European Club Association

Manchester United chief executive joins Real Madrid president on the 15-man board
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Just back from a site visit I had the displeasure of listening to Jim White and Simon Jordon discussing this, Jordon talking some bollocks as usual, they went for a break and started discussing something entirely different, almost like they had been told to STFU
 
FootballSense said:
Not Independent

The media pretense about the PL panel being so called independent must stop. There is nothing independent about this process.

It has been led by redtops American owners whose business model is to sweat the assets for the least investment possible and whose `clubs` have fallen behind because of their own actions and, to different extents, their own mismanagement.

Two of the redtops were given exclusivity to vet the appointment of the PL`s current CEO after the 2 candidates who had been offered the job withdrew.

The Chair of the PL is a Manchester United fan.

The bloke given the job of leading the review of the allegations is a Member of Arsenal FC.

Furthermore the allegations all stemmed from illegally obtained e-mails from an extortionist who is awaiting conviction after partial information was leaked to a German news outlet who distorted the position.

In the interests of `fairness, lets now have a detailed scrutiny of every aspect of the redtops over the past 15 years and require them to hand over all accounts and details of their operation to a lawyer appointed by Manchester City to pour over. That is what they have done to City.

Independent ! Do me a favour.
Click to expand...
Aren't their individual and collective brains independent of thought and impartiality?
 
flb said:
Its all about tarnishing the club and its past achievements for the past ten years-Asterix seems to be their favourite word, City only won this and that because we financially cheated blah blah blah.
One thing is for certain, since these new allegations came out, the whole club from top to bottom has galvanised massively on and off the pitch. Peps Churchillian interview at that time telling the press he's going nowhere , naming the shit house clubs for what they are was awe inspiring.
But anyway, it sounds like the PL have royally fucked up on this big time, and the club seems more confident than ever that we will win.
Click to expand...
The Gaul of these people
 
Luca1894 said:
So the "charge sheet" can be seen by anyone here: -

www.premierleague.com

Premier League statement

www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com

The PL handbook for 2009/2010 contains the rules, these can be read by anyone here:-

www.yumpu.com

Premier League Handbook - 2009/10 - Premierleague.com

Premier League Handbook - 2009/10 -
www.yumpu.com www.yumpu.com

So for 2009/2010 the PL state the following charge:-
(a) for Season 2009/10, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72 and C.75 (from 10 September 2009, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72, C.79 and C.80);

But rule C.79 relates to compensation for Postponed Matches ???, Rule C.80 relates to Ticket Sales ??
Are these plain wrong ? they don't make sense to me ?, I would welcome an expert opinion if anyone is reading.
I'm sure https://www.blackstonechambers.com will destroy any errors as blatant as this
Click to expand...
Re previous post above. The PL can NOT rewrite any of their rules, eg 2009-2010. They can only compare our audited accounts, that have also been in the public domain for 13 years now, against those rules. The PL seem to be constantly re-interpreting the Handbook until they find something, anything that they can categorise as an irregularity. The PLs desperation is absurd.
 
Len Rum said:
I always thought it was a sure fire score that City would submit an appeal based on the chair of the inquiry's support for Arsenal
Also I wonder if the club's challenge concerning the 'legality' of the charges is related to time barring?
Click to expand...
I said at the time no way could an arses fan be impartial, remember the famous letter , no doubt he agreed with that , i got laughed at mainly , smug as fuck the club feels the same
 
Saw something on twitter that actually makes sense for once:

FwftBJeWwAkgeMj

FwftBJeWcAEQgeB
 
kaz7 said:
Forgot to say that i think the prem have made us more determined to win this season, a fuck you cunts , little did they know it would drive us on to a possible treble , they made the players and pep angry and you dont like angry city
Click to expand...
Many posters don’t like angry Kaz!
 
How should we all feel if the premier manage to scrape together a diluted form of guilt? A “pinch” if you may.

How can we accept ‘football rules’ only brought in to stop a certain club while protecting others?

It will never end, city fans will always have to defend the club. When people get jealous and twisted they don’t recognise a fair and unbiased approach.

Financial rules constantly in motion to try and snare city. An immoral media operation slick and quick to attack anything that is not the populist approach.

All of this effort to discredit and destroy is based on skin tone and a misguided sense of historical superiority.

Competing is wrong. That’s why we are here. City didn’t listen, refused to accept being an also ran in the rigged football pyramid.

Football fans deserve better. The hyenas in the media do not determine right from wrong. Report the facts, don’t twist the narrative.

Stand proud and loud blues. All we did wrong is not play their game.
 
Last edited:
I'm Blue said:
he’s not wrong.
It’ll be glossed over by the haters, just like when they say “115 charges” and you point out that they are based on doctored hacked emails.
Click to expand...
He's not wrong but he hasn't gone back far enough. The process started in the early 1980's, when the "big" clubs (including his own, Spurs) blackmailed the Football League, via the threat of a breakaway, to end the ticket money sharing agreement.

That saw visiting teams get 25% of the gate money, which was far and away the biggest revenue stream at that time. That meant a club getting 60,000 fans at a game, effectively had to give away 15,000 tickets.

Imagine the impact of revenue sharing on a visiting club that regularly got gates of fewer than 30,000. It basically levels the income between the two clubs. Following the ending of that, the 60k club was bringing in twice the revenue of the 30k club.

Look at the list of league winners before 1982 and compare it to the list after 1982, to see the impact.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
He's not wrong but he hasn't gone back far enough. The process started in the early 1980's, when the "big" clubs (including his own, Spurs) blackmailed the Football League, via the threat of a breakaway, to end the ticket money sharing agreement.

That saw visiting teams get 25% of the gate money, which was far and away the biggest revenue stream at that time. That meant a club getting 60,000 fans at a game, effectively had to give away 15,000 tickets.

Imagine the impact of revenue sharing on a visiting club that regularly got gates of fewer than 30,000. It basically levels the income between the two clubs. Following the ending of that, the 60k club was bringing in twice the revenue of the 30k club.

Look at the list of league winners before 1982 and compare it to the list after 1982, to see the impact.
Click to expand...
I've been preparing a website detailing all of this grotesque hypocrisy and mis reporting of the UEFA'S FFP case, its taking longer than I thought, if anyone wants a preview to help fact check and comment please DM me.
 
wolviedinho said:
How should we all feel if the premier manage to scrape together a diluted form of guilt? A “pinch” if you may.

How can we accept ‘football rules’ only brought in to stop a certain club while protecting others?

It will never end, city fans will always have to defend the club. When people get jealous and twisted they don’t recognise a fair and unbiased approach.

Financial rules constantly in motion to try and snare city. A moral media operation slick and quick to attack anything that is not the populist approach.

All of this effort to discredit and destroy is based on skin tone and a misguided sense of historical superiority.

Competing is wrong. That’s why we are here. City didn’t listen, refused to accept being an also ran in the rigged football pyramid.

Football fans deserve better. The hyenas in the media do not determine right from wrong. Report the facts, not twist the narrative.

Stand proud and loud blues. All we did wrong is not play their game.
Click to expand...
No we cant accept any sort of pinch , we did that once before and look how far that got us
No we go on the attack and end this witch hunt once n for all
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
He's not wrong but he hasn't gone back far enough. The process started in the early 1980's, when the "big" clubs (including his own, Spurs) blackmailed the Football League, via the threat of a breakaway, to end the ticket money sharing agreement.

That saw visiting teams get 25% of the gate money, which was far and away the biggest revenue stream at that time. That meant a club getting 60,000 fans at a game, effectively had to give away 15,000 tickets.

Imagine the impact of revenue sharing on a visiting club that regularly got gates of fewer than 30,000. It basically levels the income between the two clubs. Following the ending of that, the 60k club was bringing in twice the revenue of the 30k club.

Look at the list of league winners before 1982 and compare it to the list after 1982, to see the impact.
Click to expand...
And not to mention the ITV documentary (was it World in Action) about matchday tickets, that investigated United... matchday tickets were being sold from the cafe on the corner for over three times face value (was it Pete the Greek?) and the show basically said the club were actually giving them to the cafe... why sell a ticket for face value when you could sell them for 3x that and split it out, so the club were effectively selling the tickets for twice face value... that got swept under the carpet!
 
after yesterday articles ive been thinking what articles are next and i think its gonna be how pep is leaving since he won everything and they already started asking him about it
 
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