PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

lonestay said:
You dont know nothing is happening behind the scenes ? But if the Prem have evidence that we have fraudulently entered accounts, then by law they have to report us to the relevant authority's otherwise the prem are breaking the law themselves , they have at this point not done so, so that would lead you to conclude they have no evidence or proof .
Click to expand...
Equally you could say the PL have evidence that in their view amounts to fraud and they have passed it over to an independent panel to decide if that is the case or not.

If we were found guilty of any of the charges that amounted to fraud then at that point the police would get involved to see if criminal charges followed.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
That's my only worry, the PL case will have 3 appointed by them with no say in the top table from us at all.
Click to expand...

But, as I understand, it - and again I’m an accountant not a lawyer - if they do not reach conclusions that have a genuine basis in evidence - not supposition - City will be able to take them to court.

If City are innocent of the damaging charges, they will prevail.
 
Damanino said:
not sure how independent the panel is after leaked info PL wants 12 points punishment about 2-3 weeks before the decision handed out of 10 points.
it all feels like a pantomime.

PL saying they have no more access to the case, its all to be decided by the 3 man panel, but is that true or is that what the red tops want them to say?

Khaldoon and Mansour needs to be fully aware whats going on here, its all a racist attack by PL and media.
Click to expand...
You’ve hit the nail on the head, twats like Spitty knew weeks ago the EPL was pushing for a twelve point deduction, then hey presto ten points! The line from the EPL is ‘out of our hands, independent panel etc‘ yeah fucking looks that way. Obviously this is the reason our statement made a point of saying ‘an independent panel’ expecting a stitch up that they can then take forward. Btw does anyone actually know where our case is up to? Last I heard we had gone to the High Court to dispute the panel and process, anyone know how that has gone?
 
OB1 said:
But, as I understand, it - and again I’m an accountant not a lawyer - if they do not reach conclusions that have a genuine basis in evidence - not supposition - City will be able to take them to court.

If City are innocent of the damaging charges, they will prevail.
Click to expand...
What about defamation ?
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Equally you could say the PL have evidence that in their view amounts to fraud and they have passed it over to an independent panel to decide if that is the case or not.

If we were found guilty of any of the charges that amounted to fraud then at that point the police would get involved to see if criminal charges followed.
Click to expand...
if they didnt have the requisite evidence to be absolutely sure that it amounts to fraud and they have had to pass it over to an independent panel to conclude that, then charging us publicly is the dumbest move in history, we could sue them for 100s of millions for slander
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Equally you could say the PL have evidence that in their view amounts to fraud and they have passed it over to an independent panel to decide if that is the case or not.

If we were found guilty of any of the charges that amounted to fraud then at that point the police would get involved to see if criminal charges followed.
Click to expand...
No if the Prem have proof right now we have committed fraud or suspect we have committed fraud then by law they have to report us to the relevant authorities they cant sit on that evidence for their own kangaroo court . By not reporting their suspicions they themselves are committing a criminal offence.
 
mancboy said:
if they didnt have the requisite evidence to be absolutely sure that it amounts to fraud and they have had to pass it over to an independent panel to conclude that, then charging us publicly is the dumbest move in history, we could sue them for 100s of millions for slander
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be libel?

I can't see any scenario whereby the club will be suing the PL even when (hopefully) we are fully exonerated.
 
OB1 said:
Hard to make something stick if you don’t have the evidence and the Commission behaves professionally.

Mud will stick forever with a lot of the public because they want to believe City are guilty of cheating but that is different.

If the Commission arrives at conclusions that would not be supported in a court of law, then City will do everything they can to end up in a court of law.
Click to expand...
I really don’t care about mud sticking re the media if we’re cleared - because I don’t give a damn about other fans and their hurt. So I’m really hoping we take the PL to the cleaners
 
United fan trying to be funny over the 115 charges by posting this pic. I replied saying it looks like old traffords roof
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20231119_134451_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20231119_134451_Chrome.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 157
Norbiton said:
Do we know the Premier League haven’t provided City with any evidence or is this just an assumption? There seems a widespread assumption that it is City dragging things out
Click to expand...
Nobody knows anything. People set out their stall and post accordingly.

If you hate City, it’s because we’re dragging it out and if you love City, it’s because we have so much evidence to defend ourselves that it’s bound to take ages.

It‘s highly unlikely we will hear any thy thing until the verdict is made.

In the meantime, there’ll be lots of noise on social media without substance. It’s a useful deflection and copium for fans of clubs that don’t win anymore.
 
Pablo ZZZ Peroni said:
@Dribble What moomba says.

It doesn't come over in that Sun piece but he has consistently and repeatedly highlighted the very high bar for the PL to get this shit through. See his huge contribution to this thread and his podcast/spaces work.

Before CAS there were all his very detailed articles as well.
Click to expand...
As someone said the interview was probably edited for effect by the Sun. Looking at it without prior knowledge, it comes across as a former City advisor saying we're royally fucked, but I'm happy to be corrected. )(
 
lonestay said:
We have been accused of Fraudulent accounting, cooking the books whatever you want to call it by the prem league . At this point they have produced no evidence of this accusation , also if they did have evidence then by law they should inform the relevant authorities because not to do so is a criminal act in itself, they have not done this either.
Click to expand...

This talk of fraudulent accounting needs knocking on the head. City are audited by a reputable firm of auditors, not some little cowboy outfit.

The auditors know what damage could be done to their reputation if City were found guilty of certain charges. They are likely to have contributors to City’s defence and may have gone back to double check some of their prior work. I would also expect them to have resigned from their position if they had doubts about City’s honesty etc but they have remained in place.
 
lonestay said:
The Prem want to keep this all in house with their Kangaroo court and officials who support red teams , but it cant, and wont be that way. They are accusing some very big political powerful people of fraud on a grand scale. The Prem see it as a football matter the people accused wont. Are the prem so thick and stupid that they cant see the ramifications of their actions ? This will go beyond football ,the Sheikh and/or Khaldoon only have to move some contracts around and take some away from the government give them to other countries, and Sunak will make this his number one priority, because he cant afford the country losing investment at a time when he needs as much funds in the country to try and buy votes in a looming election .
Click to expand...
I’d rather win because we’re innocent- not because of threats to the government by our owners
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Precisely. The art of losing well has died. There always has to be a reason.
Click to expand...
you only have to look at how managers from certain other clubs take defeat and blame anything from the length of the grass, to the kit and now todays ready made excuse var to know that people dont lose well anymore but as i have repeatedly said, this whole farce is more of an indictment of society in general that people will by and large blame anyone and everyone they can rather than take responsibility for their own failings.
 
Coatigan said:
Partly. No there aren't 3, there are 5. But that's semantics, my point is broader than that.

'Issues', is a good word. I've read your posts, and I totally get your logic, and you have been careful with your language.

However it has somehow created a bit of false impression, that other posters have run away with a bit. And that's what I am really responding to.

In that a number claim there are only 3 charges, and 112 either don't matter, have been dismissed, are irrelevant, or whatever other version of taking that away.

There are 5 'groups' of charges, or issues, sure. But there are still multiple charges. If we are found guilty of any one of those groups, whatever number is in it will be the scale of the verdict, and will be shouted feom the roofrops. Likewise, clearing a group clears a whole bunch, and the scale should be noted.

The group/issue with the non-cooperation is probably the most subjective one.
Click to expand...
I see your point. It's definitely not a case of there being only 3 real charges and 112 we can safely ignore. That is definitely the sort of view that some have been propagating without genuinely understanding the background.

There are five groups of charges and the first of those relates to inaccurate accounts due to sponsorships. Another to payments to players and managers.

We're not totally clear on the sponsorships one but there's no mileage in attacking the Etihad one; we'd knock that right out of the park easily enough. There's a good chance it's the Etisalat one in the early years of the current ownership, and which predates both UEFA and the PL's own FFP rules.

Those are the three but there are, as you say, two others. But they relate to both the PL and UEFA FFP rules, which rely on the submission of accounts. If the charges related to the three substantive issues charges are dismissed by the panel, then those other two automatically have to be dismissed as they're solely a consequence of the other three.

And of course there is the non-cooperation charge, which is the one most likely to stick but has no impact on the accounting ones.
 
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