PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BerkshireBlue]

Not providing true and accurate accounts

Accounts were accurate though. Doesn't matter where the money has come from for this. Whether it's an owner pumping in £200 million or not it's still accurate accounts that gave a true and fair view of the business. Any charge relating to this will be dropped very quickly.

What they think they've got is city not complying with UEFA rules and not enumerating players and staff properly. That's the only two charges they could go for in my opinion

 

[bitterblue78]

Has delaney got his wanking socks on

 

[SatOnTheWall]

Wonder how you get hold of a leaked UEFA report? Do you just ring them up?

Hi is that UEFA? I'm ringing in relation to the confidential report that you have. Which one? The confidential one. Oh great. Can you fax it to me? Yeah my number is 0161 676 7770.

The words “gill” and “david”spring to mind.

 

[bluenova]

im coming from it as a layman , sorry if i went to the extreme, but i cant get my head around the "we have to prove our innocence" theory .

all this legal speak baffles me , so does the law of the land in truth,i think lawyers are paid to make things sound good and drag stuff out :) for keeerching

I don't think it's quite that we have to prove we didn't do it, but rather, everyone tells their side, and the panel decide who they believe.

If you were up in court for murder, the prosecution would have to prove you did it, and convince a jury. The onus is on them to prove it. If they put forward a weak case, you can just say nothing.

The PL case may be on a lower bar of who is believed. If they put forward a weak case, City still need to respond to it, and their defence has to be a bit stronger. So, I don't think City need cast iron proof - they just need plausible explanations, and evidence that is better than the PL.

So, if the only evidence is the emails, and they suggest one thing, but City executives sit there and say that's not what they meant, it comes down to whether they are believed. If there isn't more evidence of something happening, and City's explanations are consistent and plausible, then they wouldn't need to prove 100% that they didn't do it.

 

[Norbiton]

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.

If you think back to 2012/13 City still thought they could pass FFP, just, because of the leeway offered by wages of players signed before its introduction being discounted. But it was only just, every penny was crucial at that time. It was suggested that Mancini’s pay off might derail it. So the £30 million advance payment against the Etisalat sponsorship was definitely necessary even if it broke no rules. Of course in the end it was futile, we’d already been deemed to fail on the 2011/12 accounts and had to accept the slap on the wrist. Trying to revive this now and suggest further penalties are appropriate all seems a bit desperate

 

[BlueMoonday]

We've seen physical assaults on our fans against Forest and Leeds at home last season and I'm sure there's been other instances.


Those who are publishing this dross are responsible for these kind of assaults and are inciting hatred towards the club. It's disgusting.

 

[Phoenix900000]

That c... Lawton just been on Talkspirt, Brazil just said come on 2011 just move on, Lawton disagreed saying City are now reeping the rewards based on what went on in 2011, Brazil then mentions come on Real Madrid & others in which Lawton agreed but washed over it bringing City back into conversation

One thing for sure it's not going to get done anytime soon

Lawton also mentioned Martin Samual bigging City up regarding the establishment but yet again changed his tone into basically City are cheats without any outcome complete

Lawton sounds like a little, bitter and jealous man :)

Fair dos to Brazil telling him what we all are thinking in terms of other club dealing and how boring this whole situation is

 

[NJMCFC184]

We've seen physical assaults on our fans against Forest and Leeds at home last season and I'm sure there's been other instances.


Those who are publishing this dross are responsible for these kind of assaults and are inciting hatred towards the club. It's disgusting.

Physical assaults?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

We're not being charged with breaches of PL FFP

But these payments were in the accounts for the seasons we made huge losses and we were fined £49m for breaching those years weren’t we? What difference did it make? They are mentioned in the CAS documents so there is nothing secret about them. The name of the person who paid them was redacted. That’s it.

 

[M18CTID]

Physical assaults?

I've not heard of anything regarding Leeds at home but a Forest fan sparked out an elderly City fan outside the turnstiles ahead of our game against them. By all accounts it was a despicable attack and there was a thread on here about it

 

[Rory Bluelow]

First off, I’ve always made it clear in all my posts whilst being on this forum that I’ve never supported FFP because it doesn’t allow clubs to break into the top 6 cartel. Why say shouldn’t a Newcastle invest to challenge! For me the PL should have greater competition so that say any of 12 clubs could win the PL.

I have not read the Times article nor seen Piers Morgan and I’ve no idea how valid the charges are against City or what evidence there is to support them.

The point I want to make is that it seems inevitable to me that legislation will at some stage be passed to create an independent regulator, something always resisted by the FA because they’ve always wanted understandably to retain self regulation.

Whether that’s a good thing or not, I don’t know but I do think the privileged position the FA and PL will come to an end. Wouldn’t it be ironic if the charges levelled by the PL against City results in their loss of self regulation?

I think they have to have independent oversight. I also suspect the PL have known this is inevitable for some time (given the political consensus on the matter). It’s been said by many that the “115” charges against City were an attempt to prove self-regulation could work before a Regulator was imposed - personally, I suspect they knew it was inevitable and saw the charges laid against City as their best and maybe last chance to nail City and drive Guardiola away. Richard Masters was privately interviewed by Liverpool and United before being appointed after others mysteriously walked away. His treatment by the HoC committee exposed him as a lightweight out of his depth. Anyone who takes the time to look at the Etisalat sponsor issues, the UEFA “investigation“ and CAS would be unimpressed by that breathy propaganda piece peddled by Morgan and the Times. As indeed were some of Morgan’s own panel - David Dein was particularly balanced and sensible. It is worth watching…you can feel the desperation. Frankly, this whole issue stinks and will be exposed in due course. In the meantime, City’s enemies/rivals get a free hit - which was always the plan.

 

[mrbelfry]

Yes, I'm aware of that but how do the 2 £15m Etisalat payments come under that remit when we have a perfectly plausible explanation for it?

I'm an idiot but as far as I understand it the Premier League licence us to play in UEFA competitions so despite there being no relevant Premier League equity funding rule at the time if we've tried to disguise equity funding to pass FFP and in doing so provided the PL with a misleading set of accounts we'd be in breach of some rule there possibly perhaps (I think some of the charges relate to misleading UEFA or something).

The accountants will be able to give more insight but this particular instance seems to refer to how we've accounted for the money. It should have been listed in a different place in the accounts. It does seem that accountancy isn't as simple as adding up numbers and there is some element of interpretation with how you account for the numbers (is it equity or income for example). So City may be applying a different interpretation of how the money is accounted (ie we didnt out the two payments in our accounts as equity investment when we should have done and because of that we have disguised equity investment. City argue it was sponsorship revenue and not owner investment so we accounted for it correctly).

Also according to what I've read on here not all the numbers even need to add up for accounts to give a fair value representation.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Neil Ashton is my guess for the "leak."

If we have fucked them out of signing Rice it's the kind of revenge tactic I'd expect from that shower of cunts.

 

[wolfie1988]

I've not heard of anything regarding Leeds at home but a Forest fan sparked out an elderly City fan outside the turnstiles ahead of our game against them. By all accounts it was a despicable attack and there was a thread on here about it

Saw plenty happen at Leeds at home. They made a point to walk around the ground giving it out. There was one particular kick off outside Entrance Y

 

[TinFoilHat]

Only one club voted for independent regulation.

That's doesn't sound like a club cheating the system. In fact, it sounds like a club doing the opposite.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If you think back to 2012/13 City still thought they could pass FFP, just, because of the leeway offered by wages of players signed before its introduction being discounted. But it was only just, every penny was crucial at that time. It was suggested that Mancini’s pay off might derail it. So the £30 million advance payment against the Etisalat sponsorship was definitely necessary even if it broke no rules. Of course in the end it was futile, we’d already been deemed to fail on the 2011/12 accounts and had to accept the slap on the wrist. Trying to revive this now and suggest further penalties are appropriate all seems a bit desperate

 

[Pam]

I suspect that the PL decided to throw everything including the kitchen sink at City in the expectation that something would stick. 115 charges is a staggering number though whether the PL can back it up is another matter.

It's a swizz. They've clumped categories of chargeable categories together and split them down into duplicates. People forget that we're not exactly talking about the collective brains of Britain here.

 

[Gundoggin]

Isnt Martin Samuels Lawton’s and Zieglers boss at the Times ???? . Is this another Wagner coup gone wrong ???

 

[Pam]

This is what I thought too. To be honest, I don’t get half of this shit, FFP is just a load of made up bollocks. To me, it reeks of desperation, they are pinning their hopes on a sponsorship deal ten year back before the prems FFP came into place.

If we get cleared, I don’t think the accusations will ever stop. It’s going to keep rolling for years and this is what all this is about, tarnishing our reputation.

Yeah. Don't care. It only works with Utd fans anyway, because they're so desperate to believe that this last 15 years could be erased from history. Boo-hoo.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Neil Ashton is my guess for the "leak."

If we have fucked them out of signing Rice it's the kind of revenge tactic I'd expect from that shower of cunts.

Who produced the YouTube video and how old is it? It is a smear because there is no new information in it so it has been recycled to keep City in the news. Are people just going to recycle court documents from CAS for the next few years and pretend they are new. The Times has damaged its own reputation. How could they run a piece based on an anonymous video with 38 subscribers? Pathetic.