PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[silvablue2013]

Was we not already fined £49m for this time period by UEFA?

 

[flb]

If these two alleged payments via Etislat are a blatant lie then the club should sue the fuck out them right away , if it’s a lie we surely have grounds to swing the hammer immediately, if it’s true however then who the fuck knows how this will end , let’s hope our paper trail is water tight.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Do you think that our owners will review the reasons for our dominence last season and conclude that the combo may not have happened without the PL charges?

In other words from an investment point of view is there a benefit in being demonized by all and sundry?

We seem to be forcing rivals to spend at a time their brand superiority has plumeted.

Forgetting FFP simply from an accountancy point of view they are struggling financially.

It's a weird one isn't it?

A couple of things.

I can't imagine the PL really expect that they can prove their allegations to any acceptable level of proof. So maybe, there is some credence to the view the "people" behind it were just out destabilise the club and to cause a stink. As you imply, I think, they didn't anticipate Guardiola fighting back the way he did, and as you say, since then the club has never looked back.

As for FFP as a whole, it is delicious that the clubs behind it are now struggling because of it. They are less successful than we are purely because we are more successful (and because they are badly managed as well, of course). So they make less money but have to spend more to catch up. It's a mini catch 22. Shame.

 

[halfcenturyup]

If these two alleged payments via Etislat are a blatant lie then the club should sue the fuck out them right away , if it’s a lie we surely have grounds to swing the hammer immediately, if it’s true however then who the fuck knows how this will end , let’s hope our paper trail is water tight.

Read the CAS award.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

It's just recycling old news to keep the agenda in the spotlight.

Clear and obvious.

Exactly. All done by those who now want a rush job at the tribunal.

The law doesn't work like that.

People study for at least seven years to know how it works.

We have cunts here who think a GCSE in English Literature is a passport to being Ironside.

I got a C in Lit, BTW - never stopped me being a journalist, either!

 

[awest]

If the chairman says we are innocent.

We are innocent.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

Piers morgan looks like an overweight giraffe who suddenly woke up one morning and thought fuck it, i'm done eating leaves off trees, I'm going to put a suit on and become a proper obnoxious little ****.

 

[Chappie]

If these two alleged payments via Etislat are a blatant lie then the club should sue the fuck out them right away , if it’s a lie we surely have grounds to swing the hammer immediately, if it’s true however then who the fuck knows how this will end , let’s hope our paper trail is water tight.

A modicum of research by you,will soothe your furrowed brow.

 

[Fordyboy46]

Exactly. All done by those who now want a rush job at the tribunal.

The law doesn't work like that.

People study for at least seven years to know how it works.

We have cunts here who think a GCSE in English Literature is a passport to being Ironside.

I got a C in Lit, BTW - never stopped me being a journalist, either!

Can you disclose which paper you worked for mate?

 

[flb]

All I will say is if it is “only” £30m is that it dispels the myth to all of our accusers we have been fiddling hundreds of millions of sponsorships since we got took over . Anyone with half a brain must be thinking “is that it?” Two discrepancies going back ten years amounting to approx 5% of our then turnover is hardly mass fiddling is it ? And they all know this club is now watertight.

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Why doesn't the club defend itself more and
Start going after these cunts for defamation of
character.
Start banning some of these fuckers from the ethihad. Do something fffs.

Because they look like obsessed crazy loons, rolling Piers Morgan into it doesn’t give it credibility, discussing it on tv doesn’t either, as for banning them, I see it as an invitation for them to come round & watch their wife receive angry anal every other week

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Can you disclose which paper you worked for mate?

All of 'em!

 

[Fordyboy46]

All of 'em!

Ha, I feel for you mate. Can't make a decent one out of all of em

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

All I will say is if it is “only” £30m is that it dispels the myth to all of our accusers we have been fiddling hundreds of millions of sponsorships since we got took over . Anyone with half a brain must be thinking “is that it?” Two discrepancies going back ten years amounting to approx 5% of our then turnover is hardly mass fiddling is it ? And they all know this club is now watertight.

It also dispels the notion of under the rug payments, money in brown bags, offshore payments etc etc, the payment is there in plain sight, they’re doing a fine job undoing that narrative, leave em to it

 

[OrigamiNinja]

So another big, fat nothing burger?

Etisalat was described pretty completely in the CAS award and, as far as I am aware, the facts aren't disputed. There is no mystery to me, other than why the club felt compelled to record the money from ADUG as a reduction of the receivable from Etisalat rather than through a current account from ADUG.

As far as I am aware, short-term funding and its repayment is allowed by FFP, so I am not even sure what the actual issue is.

There is no impact on the true and fair view given by the accounts due to the treatment of the Etisalat sponsorship. So that goes right of the window on day one. The rest is for lawyers to argue over. Fraud? Deliberate concealment? Good luck proving that when we can roll-out a dozen witnesses who were involved explaining why what happened happened the way it did. Would be a foolhardy panel to say all those witnesses were lying when the only evidence they have is a couple of "out of context" emails.

Maybe the PL is hoping the club will settle so everyone can say we were found guilty. I am not sure Mansour and Khaldoon are in the mood for that.

I guess UEFA had exactly that? I think we would all feel better about this whole process if we knew we had the ability to go to a higher body, should we get shafted like last time. Even after all these months, I still cannot believe that all the clubs sign up to PL rules knowing that should the shit hit the fan, the PL have the power to end your existence. It seems absolutely moronic to me that this is the case. £billions at stake and clubs leave themselves at the mercy of idiots, without having the ability to defend themselves at a truly independent body/court.

 

[SilverFox2]

It's a weird one isn't it?

A couple of things.

I can't imagine the PL really expect that they can prove their allegations to any acceptable level of proof. So maybe, there is some credence to the view the "people" behind it were just out destabilise the club and to cause a stink. As you imply, I think, they didn't anticipate Guardiola fighting back the way he did, and as you say, since then the club has never looked back.

As for FFP as a whole, it is delicious that the clubs behind it are now struggling because of it. They are less successful than we are purely because we are more successful (and because they are badly managed as well, of course). So they make less money but have to spend more to catch up. It's a mini catch 22. Shame.

In the long run will this siege mentality last for all parties ie fans team and of course Pep?
Personally other than time eliminating our enemies I can see no end to their provocation but is that a good thing for our togetherness?
Should we embrace it and let them feel it is us they hurt whereas they are the ones who have taken their eyes off the ball.

 

[Newman Noggs]

I guess UEFA had exactly that? I think we would all feel better about this whole process if we knew we had the ability to go to a higher body, should we get shafted like last time. Even after all these months, I still cannot believe that all the clubs sign up to PL rules knowing that should the shit hit the fan, the PL have the power to end your existence. It seems absolutely moronic to me that this is the case. £billions at stake and clubs leave themselves at the mercy of idiots, without having the ability to defend themselves at a truly independent body/court.

What do you think the alternative was to "signing up" to the PL rules was once the other clubs had voted it in ?

 

[Sir peace frog]

Unfortunately, that is not case. The burden of proof on this could well be on City (I think the difference comes if the accusation becomes fraud which it could well be). It is not always the accuser who has to prove guilt.

My point is that the people on the independent panel, whilst not being unjust or corrupt they still have a slight side.

This is not a court and the panel are not there free of charge (paid by PL).

In work I have experience of this, one where I am on the board and we refer matters to an independent panel that we present to a long with the other party.

I have no doubt the integrity of the parties to make the correct decision.

However, there are small differences in us using our independent party to a truly independent party, not saying it would change the verdict but they are little differences you know from that situation.

Can't see that being true, if it was they could say, city have been drug using, took a billion off a uae drugs barron to fund the take over, we obviously couldn't prove we haven't so according to you we would be guilty, doesn't make 1 ounce of sense

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

All I will say is if it is “only” £30m is that it dispels the myth to all of our accusers we have been fiddling hundreds of millions of sponsorships since we got took over . Anyone with half a brain must be thinking “is that it?” Two discrepancies going back ten years amounting to approx 5% of our then turnover is hardly mass fiddling is it ? And they all know this club is now watertight.

At the time in 2012 and 2013 the club reported £118 million losses. This £30 million even if City are bang to rights on it was no where near getting the club to the break even to comply with financial fair play. What advantage did City get from it? I’ve stated in previous posts City have been fined nearly £60 million from the initial settlement in 2014 and non cooperation charges in 2020. They’ve clawed back double the amount. The hysteria coverage you get of this case you’d think they’d been at it with £100s of millions, £30 million split in two even back in 2013 isn’t a lot of money in footballi financing.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Exactly. All done by those who now want a rush job at the tribunal.

The law doesn't work like that.

People study for at least seven years to know how it works.

We have cunts here who think a GCSE in English Literature is a passport to being Ironside.

I got a C in Lit, BTW - never stopped me being a journalist, either!

So you are a CLit.

But yes, it's no coincidence that Delaney wrote that bizarre piece recently that if we are found guilty on Etisalat, then that would show a pattern of behaviour for Etihad. It's utter nonsense and reeks of desperation if all they can hang their hopes on is Etisalat.