PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[deegee33]

Do you believe the PL categorically know they have absolutely nothing, but are going along with it anyway, knowing fine well they will fail?

I believe that they have nothing, but are staying with it until we slip up or they are just saving face until they can find a new villain larger than Everton.

 

[halfcenturyup]

You are entitled to your opinion, and of course it’s perfectly possible you are right, but I’ve based my view on a combination of what we have before us evidentially and the absence of any leaks; the parties involved; the likelihood that the club committed fraud on this scale and for such an extended period, especially given the involvement of auditors; the putative absence of any whistleblowers to corroborate the allegations; the protagonists behind the scene - the power they wield, plus their tack record and motives; the pace at which matters have progressed; the noises coming via backchannels from the club; the continued trajectory of players coming to the club, further sponsorship from high profile investors and accelerated infrastructure investment; the previous UEFA charges (and their complete lack of substance) and the fact that Richard Masters is a **** - and concluded that this is the most likely explanation

Not saying it’s nailed on, but fwiw, I’m confident I’m likely to be correct.

I think the fact you believe there is some substance to these allegations based solely on the fact of the charges themselves is exactly what the PL (or rather those that have pressured them) want. As others have said before me, the punishment is the charges. And if a City fan thinks what you think, then it’s clearly working.

So you don't rate my theory that the PL had no option to forward the allegations to arbitration (other than dropping the case) after City refused point blank to provide third party evidence to the investigation (for several reasons). There was undoubtedly pressure on the PL to open the investigation, and to eventually refer the allegations to a tribunal, but I get the impression it is City driving this in the way they want, rather than the PL or their influencers, and it will go the way of CAS when the club gets third party evidence involved.

Could all be bollocks, of course.

 

[marco]

i think if the PL had anything on us we would have been chucked under the bus by now at least with an interim charge, thats one from 115 that would stick and they could have restricted us this season either on transfers or points deduction but nothing the silence is defening, to me it points that the PL have no idea what there doing, i would go as far as saying there now looking for a way out without looking like a bunch of incompetent fools, No better way out than handing everything to the IR and saying 'well nothing to do with us now' watch this space

 

[JewelZee]

Do you believe the PL categorically know they have absolutely nothing, but are going along with it anyway, knowing fine well they will fail?

Unequivocally YES!

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

Can't wait for us to go nuclear on this.

 

[Citycity!Andy]

You are entitled to your opinion, and of course it’s perfectly possible you are right, but I’ve based my view on a combination of what we have before us evidentially and the absence of any leaks; the parties involved; the likelihood that the club committed fraud on this scale and for such an extended period, especially given the involvement of auditors; the putative absence of any whistleblowers to corroborate the allegations; the protagonists behind the scene - the power they wield, plus their tack record and motives; the pace at which matters have progressed; the noises coming via backchannels from the club; the continued trajectory of players coming to the club, further sponsorship from high profile investors and accelerated infrastructure investment; the previous UEFA charges (and their complete lack of substance) and the fact that Richard Masters is a **** - and concluded that this is the most likely explanation

Not saying it’s nailed on, but fwiw, I’m confident I’m likely to be correct.

I think the fact you believe there is some substance to these allegations based solely on the fact of the charges themselves is exactly what the PL (or rather those that have pressured them) want. As others have said before me, the punishment is the charges. And if a City fan thinks what you think, then it’s clearly working.

Pithy and perceptive take, GDM, I couldn’t agree more.

I think the end game - apart from the spike of purple-veined outrage when it goes nowhere - is solely to damage us in the ‘court of public opinion.’

Strangely, I became more optimistic when I thought about the ‘115 charges.’ Why announce so many, when, if the PL really had concrete evidence of valid breaches, they could be distilled into a handful of more comprehensible charges? After all, a BIG NUMBER surely condemns us. How could we possibly be innocent of all 115?

It just smacks of theatricality, trying too hard. Nonetheless it makes great headlines, but the PL clearly missed the mantra of ‘less is more.’ Especially if they have irrefutable evidence.

Like you, I’m quite confident of the outcome.

 

[Mcfc1.9.8.0]

So you don't rate my theory that the PL had no option to forward the allegations to arbitration (other than dropping the case) after City refused point blank to provide third party evidence to the investigation (for several reasons). There was undoubtedly pressure on the PL to open the investigation, and to eventually refer the allegations to a tribunal, but I get the impression it is City driving this in the way they want, rather than the PL or their influencers, and it will go the way of CAS when the club gets third party evidence involved.

Could all be bollocks, of course.

I thought CAS wasn’t an option if we were found guilty

 

[remember arthur mann]

We'll fail on something, probably spending too much on defence lawyers.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Pithy and perceptive take, GDM, I couldn’t agree more.

I think the end game - apart from the spike of purple-veined outrage when it goes nowhere - is solely to damage us in the ‘court of public opinion.’

Strangely, I became more optimistic when I thought about the ‘115 charges.’ Why announce so many, when, if the PL really had concrete evidence of valid breaches, they could be distilled into a handful of more comprehensible charges? After all, a BIG NUMBER surely condemns us. How could we possibly be innocent of all 115?

It just smacks of theatricality, trying too hard. Nonetheless it makes great headlines, but the PL clearly missed the mantra of ‘less is more.’ Especially if they have irrefutable evidence.

Like you, I’m quite confident of the outcome.

They’ve been pushing this for nearly 4 years in February when City were initially charged by Uefa and banned from the champions league for two years. Surely if this open and cut case exists it would have happened in a much quicker timeframe than what we have now? If it was cut and dry would the club just admit the charges and take the sanction rather than playing it out and ending up with something even worse?

They’ve included image rights and Mancini’s wages and gone all the way back to accounts in 2009. It’s a fishing expedition where City wouldn’t give them the info they wanted so they’ve decided to throw the kitchen sink at us with charges as the club won’t play ball.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

So you don't rate my theory that the PL had no option to forward the allegations to arbitration (other than dropping the case) after City refused point blank to provide third party evidence to the investigation (for several reasons). There was undoubtedly pressure on the PL to open the investigation, and to eventually refer the allegations to a tribunal, but I get the impression it is City driving this in the way they want, rather than the PL or their influencers, and it will go the way of CAS when the club gets third party evidence involved.

Could all be bollocks, of course.

PL had no choice, as the referral to an independent panel is the rule by which they have to resolve disciplinary issues of this type. They opened an investigation and came to us for the evidence, as per UEFA. We'd have argued against providing anything our lawyers regarded as 'fishing', that we considered wasn't strictly necessary to their case.

Based on the evidence we provided (and we have provided plenty apparently) they felt there was enough to justify invoking disciplinary measures and passed the case to a panel, as per their rules. But we know that all the issues in this case (as far as we can see) have been dealt with by UEFA at some point, without sanction.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I thought CAS wasn’t an option if we were found guilty

Go the way of CAS as in UEFA charged the club in 2019 with little to no evidence, City provided third party evidence to CAS against the allegations and CAS found in favour of the club.

No recourse to CAS this time, but the principle is the same, imo.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

I thought CAS wasn’t an option if we were found guilty

I don't think he was implying that. Rather, the verdict will be replicated as per CAS.

 

[M18CTID]

Whilst us as city fans feel the digs, snidey comments, bias reporting and even I'd suggest , legitimising of hating mcfc to the point of validating violence, the issue with us seeking any thing for damages to our reputation, possible losses or growth, is simply this....

What have they actually prevented us for doing? We've still won record amounts of silverware, the numbers show we've grown to be one of, if not the, biggest brand in the world, and we have a strong and steady plan for the future which means we will be ok and competitive regardless.

In that respect, our detractors could never win but it does mean that we would have a hard time convincing anyone that we've lost out when we're sat on a pile of silverware and profit.

An interesting take that I agree with to a large extent. In any case, if exonerated it's not really in our interests to "bankrupt the PL" but I would add that if we were in possession of evidence pointing to collusion between various clubs - and Khaldoon and Pep have implied something along those lines - in an attempt to destroy us simply because they don't like the fact that we're so successful, AND those clubs knew there was no discernible proof of wrongdoing on our part then I believe we would have a genuine case to take action against those clubs. I wouldn't like to speculate on the figures involved and I know it's America rather than the UK but I can see possible parallels with the Dominion/FOX case where FOX smeared Dominion's name based on innuendo and nothing else. Of course it could be argued that it might not be in our interests to do that either as taking our competitors down a peg or three could lead to the title battle being a one-horse race for many years to come, but on the flip side if we were to just let it slide it might empower them to try and have another go at bringing us down.

 

[Spanishbob]

An interesting take that I agree with to a large extent. In any case, if exonerated it's not really in our interests to "bankrupt the PL" but I would add that if we were in possession of evidence pointing to collusion between various clubs - and Khaldoon and Pep have implied something along those lines - in an attempt to destroy us simply because they don't like the fact that we're so successful, AND those clubs knew there was no discernible proof of wrongdoing on our part then I believe we would have a genuine case to take action against those clubs. I wouldn't like to speculate on the figures involved and I know it's America rather than the UK but I can see possible parallels with the Dominion/FOX case where FOX smeared Dominion's name based on innuendo and nothing else. Of course it could be argued that it might not be in our interests to do that either as taking our competitors down a peg or three could lead to the title battle being a one-horse race for many years to come, but on the flip side if we were to just let it slide it might empower them to try and have another go at bringing us down.

And by the same thinking it would be a one horse race with those who seek to stymie us.

 

[wolviedinho]

The public perception of the city charges is not real. The blowback will be funny and a joy to watch, not because of a city win but because they have been told a pack of lies.

Not 1 journalist had bothered to try and dig into the accusations. Instead it’s all taken as a mechanism to sell negative stories.

I will be taking the week off work when it drops .

 

[manimanc]

.
Legacy clubs doing their best to hold on to their power but they are fighting a losing battle. Their agenda will soon be exposed, if not exposed already. The world is waking up to the BS. City beating these charges will expose what has been lurking underneath.

And it is just what khaldoon said in one of the end of season interviews.

He said something along the lines of people need to be careful what they are saying and that we know stuff.

I hope this all ends up a bloody mess and the pricks running the premier league come out of it looking like the shithouses they are.

 

[halfcenturyup]

PL had no choice, as the referral to an independent panel is the rule by which they have to resolve disciplinary issues of this type. They opened an investigation and came to us for the evidence, as per UEFA. We'd have argued against providing anything our lawyers regarded as 'fishing', that we considered wasn't strictly necessary to their case.

Based on the evidence we provided (and we have provided plenty apparently) they felt there was enough to justify invoking disciplinary measures and passed the case to a panel, as per their rules. But we know that all the issues in this case (as far as we can see) have been dealt with by UEFA at some point, without sanction.

Fair enough, I just get the impression the club hasn't provided third party evidence to the investigation. Yes, thousands of pages of the club's financial information so they can say they cooperated fully (as far as they think they had to), but nothing external (which is where the real counter-evidence is). Plenty of reasons for that, but the new rule for clubs to make best efforts to provide third party evidence isn't a coincidence, of course. Nor was the club challenging that new rules couldn't be applied to prior years.

Just a theory, but it answers questions people are asking like i) why did the PL charge the club if they have no evidence? (the better question for me is what else could the PL do if no convincing evidence was presented against the allegations?) ii) why did the PL charge the club with non-cooperation and acting in bad faith when we say we have fully cooperated? (because we didn't recognise the requirement to provide third party information and we have deliberately withheld it until the panel). iii) Why did the PL recently introduce a new rule that clubs "must" obtain third party information? and iv) What was it about the news that the club was seeking confirmation that new rules couldn't be applied retroactively?

Anyway, as I said, just a theory and don't want to derail the thread again, so will shut up. :)

 

[Gundoggin]

An interesting take that I agree with to a large extent. In any case, if exonerated it's not really in our interests to "bankrupt the PL" but I would add that if we were in possession of evidence pointing to collusion between various clubs - and Khaldoon and Pep have implied something along those lines - in an attempt to destroy us simply because they don't like the fact that we're so successful, AND those clubs knew there was no discernible proof of wrongdoing on our part then I believe we would have a genuine case to take action against those clubs. I wouldn't like to speculate on the figures involved and I know it's America rather than the UK but I can see possible parallels with the Dominion/FOX case where FOX smeared Dominion's name based on innuendo and nothing else. Of course it could be argued that it might not be in our interests to do that either as taking our competitors down a peg or three could lead to the title battle being a one-horse race for many years to come, but on the flip side if we were to just let it slide it might empower them to try and have another go at bringing us down.

Absolutely MCFC will have evidence of certain clubs and certain clubs “figures” colluding against us . Pep has called this out several times including hanging Levy out to dry . Levy is very quiet these days which is interesting and his side kick has been arrested/ charged with fraud . I personally think MCFC will want to settle this matter once and for all , the fall out could be spectacular !

 

[give it to gordon]

PL had no choice, as the referral to an independent panel is the rule by which they have to resolve disciplinary issues of this type. They opened an investigation and came to us for the evidence, as per UEFA. We'd have argued against providing anything our lawyers regarded as 'fishing', that we considered wasn't strictly necessary to their case.

Based on the evidence we provided (and we have provided plenty apparently) they felt there was enough to justify invoking disciplinary measures and passed the case to a panel, as per their rules. But we know that all the issues in this case (as far as we can see) have been dealt with by UEFA at some point, without sanction.

So innocent of UEFA but not the pl !. So by that as both Chelsea and rags failed UEFA ffp they must both of failed the pl ffp. Yet I have only heard of Chelsea being investigated by the pl !

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

So innocent of UEFA but not the pl !. So by that as both Chelsea and rags failed UEFA ffp they must both of failed the pl ffp. Yet I have only heard of Chelsea being investigated by the pl !

That doesn't necessarily follow as the PL C&SR rules allow higher losses than UEFA's FFP. If you failed the CSR though, then you'd almost certainly have breached FFP.