PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

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 believe that once you factor in the diplomatic ramifications it would make it very difficult, I expect the UK government is waving a big stick at them at the moment, but perhaps this is what it's all about
 
projectriver said:
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
Click to expand...
That’s a huge burden on the panel then.
 
Luca1894 said:
Radio 4 Today Programme

In between the extremely serious escalation in Ukraine and the CBI death spiral the Today editors found time to discuss the PL charges.

A football finance expert (for balance from Liverpool University) summarised the charges as historical and concerned three categories (usual tropes), inflating revenues, deflating costs and non cooperation. Which all sounded a bit lame really, He did confirm we were exonerated at CAS but wasn't pushed why the PL charges were needed. No mention of the poitically motivated nature of the charges ie the PL/cartel but did say the tribal nature of fans meant City were unfairly convicted daily in the MSM and social media.

However he did admit the club management in all areas was excellent. I think any reasonable neutral listener would be thnking wtf is this doing on the Today Programme.

We can expect lots more of this as the build up continues to Saturday...
Click to expand...
Kieran Maguire He only lectures at Liverpool University actually a Brighton fan, the go to expert on football finances for most of the media written a book The Price of Football He generally gives a facts based view on things and wouldnt be speculating on the issues behind the charges

The Price of Football

Following the money behind the beautiful game.
priceoffootball.com priceoffootball.com

Theres also a twice weekly podcast to discuss all football financial related issues
 
If City were hiding anything in the very early monitoring periods of financial fair play, how come we reported losses of nearly £200 million in the 2010/11 season and then £97 million in the 2011/12 season? Our accounts department didn’t do a very good job of cooking the books then did they?
 
abu13 said:
For what it's worth i found this link which looks at the case from a legal standpoint.

I feel he explains how difficult it is going to be for the PL to get these charges to stick.

Click to expand...


Yeah, he’s mostly correct. He is in particular correct to emphasise the seriousness of the main allegations, namely that for 9 years our board have knowingly signed off false accounts. That’s an allegation of criminal conduct against some exceptionally high profile people.

He gets into a bit of a tangle about the standard of proof, but I suspect that this is not because he doesn’t understand the concepts involved, He has just struggled to simplify the concepts to a non-legal audience.

I think he’s wrong to say that the non-co-operation charges really stand or fall with everything else. The non-co-operation charges are, if you like, about the procedure within the investigation rather than the substance of what’s being investigated, and so far I think it’s fair to say we haven’t covered ourselves in glory in co-operating with the PL. That’s where I think we are most at risk.

There is of course a degree of risk on all the charges, but generally speaking he is correct to say the PL have got a mountain to climb, and when you think about the task they face it really is amazing that they brought the case at all.
 
Geo72 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'd prefer "You're just another Prick in the wall"
 
projectriver said:
It will be 3 lawyers. It doesn't have to be but I am sure it will be
Click to expand...
So if it is 3 lawyers, does anyone know what their personal back ground is, will anyone know if they're interested in football, if they are interested they must favour a certain club, or maybe even despise some.
To be fair I dont know where I'm going with this
 
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...

We have no idea what the PL were advised, if they were advised at all, before bringing these charges.

If they were advised, and I imagine they were, I strongly suspect the discussion went along these lines:

LAWYER: “If we want to make these charges stick, we’ve got some serious difficulties ahead. (discusses difficulties at length.) For all those reasons I give you maybe a 20% chance of success, and a very big chance that you will generate very considerable adverse publicity with unforeseeable adverse consequences for yourselves if you fail. Are you sure you want to go ahead?”

PL: “Absolutely.”




EDIT I must add in case it is not sufficiently clear that the decision to proceed was the PL’s and the PL’s alone. They may have taken into account factors beyond the simple prospect of success.
 
Last edited:
Chris in London said:
We have no idea what the PL were advised, if they were advised at all, before bringing these charges.

If they were advised, and I imagine they were, I strongly suspect the discussion went along these lines:

LAWYER: “If we want to make these charges stick, we’ve got some serious difficulties ahead. (discusses difficulties at length.) For all those reasons I give you maybe a 20% chance of success, and a very big chance that you will generate very considerable adverse publicity with unforeseeable adverse consequences for yourselves if you fail. Are you sure you want to go ahead?”

PL: “Absolutely.”




EDIT I must add in case it is not sufficiently clear that the decision to proceed was the PL’s and the PL’s alone. They may have taken into account factors beyond the simple prospect of success.
Click to expand...

PL: Wait 5 minutes until I get back to you

PL discusses lawyers advice with those who've been putting the pressure on them - FSG, Levy, Glazers etc. FSG, Levy, Glazers discuss with each other and "instruct" PL to proceed.

PL gets back to lawyers: "Absolutely"



Fair to suggest that might be the middle part?
 
Chris in London said:
We have no idea what the PL were advised, if they were advised at all, before bringing these charges.

If they were advised, and I imagine they were, I strongly suspect the discussion went along these lines:

LAWYER: “If we want to make these charges stick, we’ve got some serious difficulties ahead. (discusses difficulties at length.) For all those reasons I give you maybe a 20% chance of success, and a very big chance that you will generate very considerable adverse publicity with unforeseeable adverse consequences for yourselves if you fail. Are you sure you want to go ahead?”

PL: “Absolutely.”




EDIT I must add in case it is not sufficiently clear that the decision to proceed was the PL’s and the PL’s alone. They may have taken into account factors beyond the simple prospect of success.
Click to expand...

If the decision to proceed was down to the PL alone, then I can only surmise that they acted because of the pressure brought by the PL clubs most likely to be affected by our success.

Whether they like it or not, the financial success of the PL includes the interest brought to the competition by City's success, so why try and kill that if not at the behest of those clubs who are being pushed out of the money trough.
 
Chris in London said:
We have no idea what the PL were advised, if they were advised at all, before bringing these charges.

If they were advised, and I imagine they were, I strongly suspect the discussion went along these lines:

LAWYER: “If we want to make these charges stick, we’ve got some serious difficulties ahead. (discusses difficulties at length.) For all those reasons I give you maybe a 20% chance of success, and a very big chance that you will generate very considerable adverse publicity with unforeseeable adverse consequences for yourselves if you fail. Are you sure you want to go ahead?”

PL: “Absolutely.”




EDIT I must add in case it is not sufficiently clear that the decision to proceed was the PL’s and the PL’s alone. They may have taken into account factors beyond the simple prospect of success.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose it's one way to run a business .....
 
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