PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

projectriver said:
Yes I think the charge is far more than who paid for the contractual requirement. It is an allegation that the contract was not as disclosed or as was found in the club's accounts. On sponsorship, I think this is simply a re-run of UEFA/CAS presented with more disclosure and a second bite.
Click to expand...
Why would a legal firm advise their client that they have a reasonable chance of winning given this and the previous CAS decision in our favour?

Significant new evidence?

A lower bar of proof set given that it’s a PL appeal panel?

Is it just that Lawyers will say anything as long as they get paid?

All of the above?
 
Cobwebcat said:
Why would a legal firm advise their client that they have a reasonable chance of winning given this and the previous CAS decision in our favour?

Significant new evidence?

A lower bar of proof set given that it’s a PL appeal panel?

Is it just that Lawyers will say anything as long as they get paid?

All of the above?
Click to expand...
  1. Not impossible
  2. Definitely PL will hope for more documentary evidence
  3. Not a materially lower bar
  4. Lawyers are not infallible (my views here https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/business-of-sport/arid-41072465.html)
  5. Some of the above
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
It all points to the PL repeating the mistakes of UEFA and making allegations against City with little or no evidence. The main purpose of this witchunt has been to undermine City driven by a hostile (and in come cases racist) media.
We still don't know why the PL would put its own reputation at risk to do this. When Richard Masters came in he had an opportinity to review this politically-motivated investigation and find a way to stop it and save some face.
Instead he chose to go nuclear. It's not clear why he did this but you can only assume he was under severe pressure from the Directors at MUFC and LFC who actually vetted his appointment. We still don't know why three other candidates (who were offered the PL job) pulled out. Perhaps part of the deal with Masters was that a condition of taking the job was that "he should do something about City." Something smells about the entire case.
Click to expand...

Maybe the club should ask for the minutes of the meetings between Masters and MUFC and Masters and LFC to establish if there was any pressure on Masters to represent their interests above those of the PL? Would be fun.
 
halfcenturyup said:
But I would imagine it's almost suicidal professionally to make charges like that if they can't prove them? I can't imagine that even the PL is that stupid. Strike that, maybe I can.
Click to expand...
They can feel confident. They can underestimate the practical and commercial reality. They can believe a panel will see it like them. All litigators have lost cases they thought they would win. But that cuts both ways.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
We still don't know why three other candidates (who were offered the PL job) pulled out. Perhaps part of the deal with Masters was that a condition of taking the job was that "he should do something about City." Something smells about the entire case.
Click to expand...
My thoughts too. Especially as it is public knowledge that three others offered the job pulled out without the reasons made known. You would not expect such job offers to be announced before appointments are confirmed.
 
projectriver said:
  1. Not impossible
  2. Definitely PL will hope for more documentary evidence
  3. Not a materially lower bar
  4. Lawyers are not infallible (my views here https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/business-of-sport/arid-41072465.html)
  5. Some of the above
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link to your article it was a good read.

I can’t get my head around how such serious accusations can be decided by a panel of three people, two of which have no legal experience. In the same vain I can’t understand how a panel’s decision could lead to serious consequences for the people involved. Its either a serious matter for a serious court who have the power to send people to prison or it’s three people’s opinion who can assign punishments to the club itself such as a points deduction. In my mind it can’t be both.

I know I’m wrong I just don’t know where.
 
Cobwebcat said:
Thanks for the link to your article it was a good read.

I can’t get my head around how such serious accusations can be decided by a panel of three people, two of which have no legal experience. In the same vain I can’t understand how a panel’s decision could lead to serious consequences for the people involved. Its either a serious matter for a serious court who have the power to send people to prison or it’s three people’s opinion who can assign punishments to the club itself such as a points deduction. In my mind it can’t be both.

I know I’m wrong I just don’t know where.
Click to expand...
It will be 3 lawyers. It doesn't have to be but I am sure it will be
 
projectriver said:
It will be 3 lawyers. It doesn't have to be but I am sure it will be
Click to expand...
Interesting but say these guys found City guilty of serious financial misconduct what happens to those people..what court decides their personal punishment given that there is hardly any recourse to appeal?
 
Cobwebcat said:
Interesting but say these guys found City guilty of serious financial misconduct what happens to those people..what court decides their personal punishment given that there is hardly any recourse to appeal?
Click to expand...
Other agencies could get involved. But this will act as a strong disincentive to the panel to find serious allegations proven. What panel would want to find proven such serious, deliberate, long standing, conspiratorial behaviour by such esteemed directors and execs in multiple companies. And then there is the case of the Chairman - a serious international executive. And the diplomatic issue. All of this ups the ante for any panel.
 
Last edited:
Screenshot_20230606-120447_Chrome.jpg
"Who are we kidding? Brilliant football team aside, brilliant manager aside, we find it very hard to believe that City’s current financial standing has no connection to their potential alleged breaches.

Indeed, among reports of fake sponsorships inflating revenue, it’s very difficult to take the current circumstances the club finds itself in vaguely seriously.

Even taking into account Premier League revenues and the now relatively well-run nature of the side, how on earth can Manchester City claim to be fairly more valuable than the most dominant side in Europe in Carlo Ancelotti’s Real Madrid?"
Click to expand...
Oh dear! Oh deary, deary, deary me! Doesn't sound like the Dippers are taking the news very well.

Even funnier, they reckon it's us who've made the news up & are BRAGGING about it! :-)

https://www.empireofthekop.com/2023/06/06/manchester-city-shocking-announcement-amid-115-charges/
 
The way I see it is this is never going away. If we are found guilty we are cheats. If we’re found innocent we are cheats anyway. We can’t win. So really, do we care?

It seems many fans, the club, Pep, are turning the negativity to our advantage. It’s us against them and a lot of us are comfortable with that.

Every stone thrown our way by the cartel sponsored media is just more aggregate for us to build a wall between us and them.

In the trend of the 80s hit ‘Everywhere’ I’d love for the City fans to go further back to the late 70s with Pink Floyd’s ‘Another brick in the wall’. Here’s my clumsy attempt of a collective message to Delaney, Liew etc.

You don’t have no education.

You don’t have no thought control

You’re dark sarcasm in the pressbox

Delaney leave them boys alone

Hey, Migel, leave them boys alone

Cuz

All in all it’s just another brick in the wall

All in all your just another prick who will fall


Like I said, clumsy, but I imagine being at the ground, hearing that baseline come in and 50k City fans sticking a collective ‘fuck you’ up to the rag media.
 
projectriver said:
Other agencies could get involved. But this will act as a strong disincentive to the panel to find serious allegations proven. What panel would want to find proven such serious, deliberate, long standing, conspiratorial behaviour by such esteemed directors and execs in multiple companies. And then there is the case of the Chairman - a serious international executive. And the diplomatic issue. All of this ups the ante for any panel.
Click to expand...
I understand now. It’s all clear.

Can you imagine if other agencies get involved and then find no wrong doing?!

Boggles the mind. Much easier to forget the whole thing.
 
Cobwebcat said:
I understand now. It’s all clear.

Can you imagine if other agencies get involved and then find no wrong doing?!

Boggles the mind. Much easier to forget the whole thing.
Click to expand...
No I think the issue is that if the first domino (the panel) fell on such serious matters, the rest of the dominos will likely follow on... I have said many times that all hell will break loose if we did lose on all this
 
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