PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Right, unashamed lazy bollocks here, what's the craic?

Should we be shitting ourselves or just the same as it was beforehand
 
You al know that in the run up to the Liverpool game this will be regurgitated and lots of crap will be written, it’s how the sports media works

As far as I can see City don’t have much to worry about but it’s always been a double edged sword in that even if the charges don’t stick the court of public opinion will have us guilty
 
Are we being accused of criminal activity?
If so, why is this a premier league investigation and not a criminal investigation?
If the Premier League had any evidence of criminal activity, surely they would have to go to the police?
 
Norman kneejerk said:
The Chelsea one seems a bit strange in that the PL seem to be saying they hadn't noticed anything in the reporting from Chelsea and their advisors for years and years but now Chelsea have just mentioned it to them.

Makes it sound like they were oblivious to everything!
Click to expand...
The PL largely rely on what clubs tell them, via their audited accounts and other financial statements. If Chelsea hid things, via transactions using offshore accounts, probably very little the PL could have done to notice that.
 
Dribble said:
When we're audited, we give the auditor's full access to the accounts & supply anything they request from the folio.

They don't look through every transaction, receipt, invoice & purchase order. Essentially they rely on the accuracy of what we give them to do their job.

We sign to say the info is accurate & they sign to say they're satisfied to certify our accounts according to the info supplied.

At no point have BDO said "City refused us access to A B or C" or "We had serious concerns over X Y or Z, which City failed to explain/supply additional info for, so we've made an advisory note or not certified the accounts".

What this is all about is the difference between UK Law & PL rules. UK Law trumps it every time. This is a Pandora's Box the PL may wish they never opened.

The IFR is the PL's worst nightmare coming true. If they weren't self serving bent bastards, they wouldn't be so vehemently against it. \0/
Click to expand...
What you are citing are "audit exceptions". They must be disclosed in the Auditor's report. Apparently the PL believes themselves to be better suited for the task. It's truly a fucking joke...
 
If City are found guilty, on any of the charges, I anticipate there will be many counter-accusations against other clubs. The Premier League have opened a snake pit from which they might easily never escape
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
The PL largely rely on what clubs tell them, via their audited accounts and other financial statements. If Chelsea hid things, via transactions using offshore accounts, probably very little the PL could have done to notice that.
Click to expand...
Exactly. If transactions are off the books in entities not audited by the club’s auditors, they won’t be picked up by the EPL.
 
Judge Roughneck said:
My personal choice? Jordan or Carragher. Collymore has his own self destruction button.
Click to expand...
My vote would be for Carragher, not just for this and other football matters but also because I had the misfortune of seeing the spitting dick on some... (now, don't shoot me, it was an accident and I honestly don't normally watch it, I just switched channels early and saw the tail end of it)... celebrity gogglebox thing last night and he was even just a horrible, cringey wanker on that too!

Saying stuff that really made my skin crawl. What a twat!
 
Dribble said:
I fully understand what you're saying, but I think you've got me wrong.

If you're a huge company, do auditors go over every single invoice, even those in the petty cash for bog rolls & biscuits?

We have independent auditors who work with finance to go over everything & highlight any discrepancies.

My comment about relying on supplied data goes to issues like those affecting Donald tRump.

When years long fraud was uncovered, Mazars confirmed they were acting on information received & requested. They subsequently dropped him as a client & testified against him in court.

As a CPA you'll appreciate cooking the books can easily be done, especially when dealing with paper trails. Even in the days of electronic entries, where there's a will, there's a way, hence why there's an element of trust.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying but in my years conducting audits the level of testing we conducted was quite extensive and if you know what you're doing it's really not as difficult as one may think to find irregularities. I can't imagine City going to the lengths that would be required to deceive a top level firm, let alone year upon year. And then the PL steps in without anywhere near the access to our books given to the auditors and claims that our reporting is fraudulent...that's more than a bit of a stretch, never mind proving it in a formal manner while being opposed by our brilliant attorneys...
 
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