PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

KS55 said:
Just going by memory. City, I think, said that there was a gap of several years between the two that were mashed together. Memory only, not verified, but I don’t think I imagined it!
Click to expand...
I think the 6 emails released were in some instances years apart as they refer to different subjects, but I think (I may be wrong) the two concatenated ones were part of the same email chain.
 
Dribble said:
Ordinarily you'd highlight the pertinent points to support your case, but also provide the full exchanges as an appendix so they can be forensically scrutinised.

It's not stated that UEFA did this, but if they didn't, it's extremely amateurish of them. If I were defending, the first thing I'd highlight is why hasn't the full exchange been provided, but only selected sections spliced together, which in isolation paint a wholly different picture to the reality of the situation?
Click to expand...
CAS said that UEFA relied on partial emails, ie selected text, and copied parties were omitted. Since they specifically mentioned this in their judgement, I would guess that had an effect on CAS verdict.
In the second batch that Der Speigel released, one of the authors had clearly been changed at the foot but not the header.
 
If we comprehensively beat the charges it will not change the attitudes of the media and opposing fans , we have been already been found guilty by the great unwashed , the Premier league have already done the damage at the behest of the red 'istree clubs.
It was always the intention of to at least get the charges in the public domain and it was job done , similar to the UEFA charges despite CAS finding in our favour it did little to change the narrative around our club. Its a back handed compliment when you realise how desperate some clubs have got , when the Sheik got involved we were a vanity project/sports washing and he would get bored , it hasnt quite worked out for our antagonsists has it , we are now the most succesful and best run football club in the world and even post-Pep Guardiola we will have a plan in place, we are here to stay.
 
cheekybids said:
Interesting if Pinto becomes our witness
Click to expand...
Witness to what? he's already admitted to hacking us and taking around 5,500,000 documents and emails. I'm not even sure he looked at anything given the sheer amount of information. Der Spiegel had to invest in specialised software just o try and make sense of it all looking for cogent threads. The fact that they only initially released 6 of them should say enough for anyone but UEFA & the PL.
 
Dribble said:
Didn't Pinto claim to have more info on City he'd be willing to hand over in exchange for a plea deal?
Click to expand...
I think he said he would give them further hard drives of hacked information but not specifically about us. As far as I'm aware, Der Spiegel have all of that locked up on multiple hard drives.
 
Centurions said:
I think the 6 emails released were in some instances years apart as they refer to different subjects, but I think (I may be wrong) the two concatenated ones were part of the same email chain.
Click to expand...
Possibly, but they could still be years apart if the author just picked up a thread where it stood, to put his mail into context.
 
cheekybids said:
Is that a wild tabloid claim?

Strange that Der Spiegel didn’t hand everything over to UEFA & PL.
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20231226_132849_Chrome.jpg

"According to the Mail On Sunday, Pinto has, through his lawyers, declared that he is willing to help the Premier League’s investigation, which has dragged on since December 2018, following the Football Leaks allegations.

What bearing that has on the case is unclear, partly because the extent and focus of the League’s investigation is not known, and partly because there is no indication that Pinto has any fresh evidence not already placed before Uefa, the League and CAS.

It seems that material is the same as Uefa used for their investigation, some of which was dismissed by CAS because it transgressed Uefa’s own rules that any alleged offences more than five years old were time-barred.

City critics claim that the Premier League’s own inquiry is not hindered in the same way, as there is no specific reference to a time limit in their rules.

But the League’s handbook does say that English law supersedes anything within those rules - and there is a six-year bar on any such cases under the Limitation Act."

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-ffp-rui-pinto-21139440
 
jimmygrimblesboots said:
If we comprehensively beat the charges it will not change the attitudes of the media and opposing fans , we have been already been found guilty by the great unwashed , the Premier league have already done the damage at the behest of the red 'istree clubs.
It was always the intention of to at least get the charges in the public domain and it was job done , similar to the UEFA charges despite CAS finding in our favour it did little to change the narrative around our club. Its a back handed compliment when you realise how desperate some clubs have got , when the Sheik got involved we were a vanity project/sports washing and he would get bored , it hasnt quite worked out for our antagonsists has it , we are now the most succesful and best run football club in the world and even post-Pep Guardiola we will have a plan in place, we are here to stay.
Click to expand...
They say tainted titles despite half the PL failing FFP at one time or another, so if Fulham win the PL will it be tainted as they once failed FFP or Wolves or United
 
Centurions said:
Witness to what? he's already admitted to hacking us and taking around 5,500,000 documents and emails. I'm not even sure he looked at anything given the sheer amount of information. Der Spiegel had to invest in specialised software just o try and make sense of it all looking for cogent threads. The fact that they only initially released 6 of them should say enough for anyone but UEFA & the PL.
Click to expand...

That he made no changes so there’s been a hatchet job performed by Der Spiegel. Im not being serious & it won’t make a difference with the case but it would be nice if it was included in the judgement.

You’ve then got bad faith actors in Der Spiegel, UEFA, PL & our fellow premier league teams.
Quite a story. (that no one wants to write)
 
Dribble said:
View attachment 102435

"According to the Mail On Sunday, Pinto has, through his lawyers, declared that he is willing to help the Premier League’s investigation, which has dragged on since December 2018, following the Football Leaks allegations.

What bearing that has on the case is unclear, partly because the extent and focus of the League’s investigation is not known, and partly because there is no indication that Pinto has any fresh evidence not already placed before Uefa, the League and CAS.

It seems that material is the same as Uefa used for their investigation, some of which was dismissed by CAS because it transgressed Uefa’s own rules that any alleged offences more than five years old were time-barred.

City critics claim that the Premier League’s own inquiry is not hindered in the same way, as there is no specific reference to a time limit in their rules.

But the League’s handbook does say that English law supersedes anything within those rules - and there is a six-year bar on any such cases under the Limitation Act."

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-ffp-rui-pinto-21139440
Click to expand...

So according to the daily mail he’s offered to do something that won’t be allowed……

Just how would offering to help the premier league have saved his bacon anyway?
 
halfcenturyup said:
It's pretty clear. This is a civil case. The panel doesn't have to conclude that there was any criminal conduct. They just have to decide whether or not, on the balance of probabilities, the club breached its contract with the PL to provide accounts that give a true and fair view of the club's activities. There is no doubt the panel has competence to do that.

Where are I agree with you, though, is in two areas: firstly, if there is a decision that upholds the PL's position on the balance of probabilities, then there is the inference of criminality, but this is dealt with by the need for higher levels of cogency to come to that conclusion and, even then, it would not be, in any way, a criminal conviction; secondly, to determine if any of the alleged breaches are time-barred, the panel will have to directly address the question of fraud or concealment. If they are not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that there was fraud or concealment, then the majority of the charges are time-barred. If they are satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that there was fraud or concealment regarding any of the alleged breaches, then those breaches are not time-barred even if older than 6 years. If I was on the panel, I would be pushing to not consider the time-barred aspect unless any of the alleged breaches are actually found in favour of the PL, effectively kicking that particular can of worms down the road, as it were. This would suit the club, I think, because they would much rather the panel finds against the PL on each charge, than have the majority of the charges time-barred again, I imagine.

I have no idea how the PL intends to prove fraud and concealment, though, which is why almost everyone (who knows what they are talking about) thinks they have over-reached, and once the club presents its third party evidence on each of the alleged breaches, in my opinion, after a great deal of expensive umming and arring, that will be that, especially given the profile of the case, the need for cogency and the risks to a large number of reputations on all sides of coming to an unfortunate conclusion.

I have presented a scenario to explain all this (the PL apparently over-reaching, the PL complaining about the club's lack of cooperation and bad faith, the club insisting it has cooperated etc..) which I think makes sense, but we will have to wait and see. The more I think about it, the more I am convinced the club's position is just fine.
Click to expand...
Just one query on your post. Do statute of limitations apply in civil ( as opposed to criminal) cases in the case of fraud or concealment?
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
View attachment 102435

"According to the Mail On Sunday, Pinto has, through his lawyers, declared that he is willing to help the Premier League’s investigation, which has dragged on since December 2018, following the Football Leaks allegations.

What bearing that has on the case is unclear, partly because the extent and focus of the League’s investigation is not known, and partly because there is no indication that Pinto has any fresh evidence not already placed before Uefa, the League and CAS.

It seems that material is the same as Uefa used for their investigation, some of which was dismissed by CAS because it transgressed Uefa’s own rules that any alleged offences more than five years old were time-barred.

City critics claim that the Premier League’s own inquiry is not hindered in the same way, as there is no specific reference to a time limit in their rules.

But the League’s handbook does say that English law supersedes anything within those rules - and there is a six-year bar on any such cases under the Limitation Act."

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-city-ffp-rui-pinto-21139440
Click to expand...
Doesn't Abu Dhabi have a secret service who could have a little chat with him next to a 10th floor window?
 
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