PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Chipmeister said:
There is a very clear anomaly here and surprisingly or not, NO journalist has reported it. Although it has been touched on here.
A number of charges date back to 2009/10 - 2013 which precludes FFP introduced 2014 and the even later introduction of PSR.
So if the charges pre 2014 are of a financial matter then the issue is not of non compliance with any FFP rules but surely a criminal matter, fraud and the TAX authorities or Police should be investigating not the Premier League.
Think about that for a minute. Case dismissed.
Click to expand...
 
oakiecokie said:
And even quite a few Blue Mooners don`t understand this Colin.
Click to expand...

Tbf, the alleged breaches affect the club's PSR position if they are proven, which is why the alleged breaches include not complying with the PL's PSR rules in the three years 2015-2018, I think. If they aren't proven, no problem.
 
Must have missed the news item of the PL sacking numerous Auditors for 10 years of total incompetence regards MCFC accounts.And a question for our unbiased press but have they asked who actually signed the paper work asking Auditors to go back over their work 10 years previous ,just asking.
 
My personal favourite in all this is the assertion that we have an unfair advantage in that we have expensive legal representation - Dame Dinenage - a Baroness no less, for services to the bleeding obvious and doing her job - and someone with form for condemning before a legal verdict, I think it was she, asked/intimated about whether is was fair we had expensive lawyers compared to "smaller clubs". So now premiership clubs can't afford decent legal advice and lawyers? Look at the transfer fees and salaries they pay - er I think they can. It appears, given the caution (for once from Masters - an inveterate gobshite) and the clear avoidance to anything with our case - that our lawyers are all over this and already earning their corn. How unfair of us to defend ourselves so well!! The Government would never think of using DLA Piper, Dentons, Addleshaw Goddard, Browne Jacobson, Burges Salmon, DAC Beachcroft etc etc and have a Legal Framework reserve of £430M to crush the little man.
 
Last edited:
blueste41 said:
They may well do!
It's not unusual for an organisation to expose criminality and then pass their evidence to the police who then prosecute on the basis of the information provided.
No better example of that currently than the post office scandal!
Click to expand...
The PL have claimed they have enough evidence to accuse us & hold a hearing, so if that's the case why aren't they passing their 'evidence' on to the relevant authorities now?

Moreover, our investigations been in the public domain for nearly 6 years for all to see & hear, so why haven't the authorities swooped on the Etihad yet?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Our charges are nothing to do with the PL's Profit & Sustainability Rules. They are to do with wider PL Rules about reporting true and fair accounts and acting in good faith.
And even quite a few Blue Mooners don`t understand this Colin.

How can the Premier league charge someone for not acting in good faith when they cannot act in good faith either. Ffs
 
blueste41 said:
It's many City fans mind set these days, everything is a stitch up from the cup draws we don't get to the ones United do get. Referring decisions, order of premier league fixtures, commentary bias, media coverage bias, the list is literally endless.
The funny thing is that fans of opposing teams agree it's just that they think it's a stich up in our favour!
Click to expand...
understandable, for many reasons, not confined to football and sport generally. Government, business, judicial anomalies, etc, things that affect populations, are proven to have agendas, why would football be different?
Apart from those privy to meetings, the public has to rely on what they read, the old "it must be true, it's in the papers", has still not gone away, despite the countless lies, plus, what's not reported is taken as evidence that it can't be true. The PO stitch-up just the latest case in point.
The carpet-bombing tactic of accusing City of 115 breaches could rebound on the prem, if many of them are proven to be baseless, it weakens their entire offensive, and if our legal bods forensicaly challenge each and every one of them, then the costs of the process could/would be in 8 figures, which definiely would cause a few arse-holes to twitch even for the FSG-backed prem. The "hateful eight" have painted themselves into a corner, in my humble opinion, a tame independent adjudicator their wild card.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
My personal favourite in all this is the assertion that we have an unfair advantage in that we have expensive legal representation - Dame Dinenage - a Baroness no less, for services to the bleeding obvious and doing her job - and someone with form for condemning before a legal verdict, I think it was she, asked/intimated about whether is was fair we had expensive lawyers compared to "smaller clubs". So now premiership clubs can't afford decent legal advice and lawyers? Look at the transfer fees and salaries they pay - er I think they can. It appears, given the caution (for once from Masters - an inveterate gobshite) and the clear avoidance to anything with our case - that our lawyers are all over this and already earning their corn. How unfair of us to defend ourselves so well!!
Click to expand...
Dineage should surely be asking the questions just like her Dad used to do:

“How”

One for the FOC’s.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
is this a criminal case or a civil case? If it’s criminal the PL can look back as far as they want. If it’s not deemed any law breaking has taken place the limitations act kicks in at the point of discovery which is the Der Spiegal articles. I imagine this is probably what the back and forth with the Premier League is all about.
Click to expand...
We've faced these accusations previously & were cleared, & we're now facing the same accusations again by a UEFA related party. Double jeopardy?
 
Last edited:
blueste41 said:
It's many City fans mind set these days, everything is a stitch up from the cup draws we don't get to the ones United do get. Referring decisions, order of premier league fixtures, commentary bias, media coverage bias, the list is literally endless.
The funny thing is that fans of opposing teams agree it's just that they think it's a stich up in our favour!
Click to expand...

Some is good old fashioned paranoia but sometimes the paranoia is for good reason.

We’ve seen rule changes, bans, charges after blatant attempts to destroy us so sometimes people get carried away when they say they are out to get us & sometimes they are on the money.
 
What's really upsetting in all of this is the collateral damage to our reputation.
Some of the comments I read are very upsetting and border line racist.
 
M12Blue said:
My understanding of pages in the distant past is that we are being done for false accounting, fraud which is a criminal offence. So my question is why aren't the police and hmrc all over us, as surely PL have a duty to refer us at the onset of suspicion.
Click to expand...
Nail on the head aside from fraud... What we're being accused of amounts to fraud, so why's that word never been used, & why hasn't the 'evidence' been handed over to the Plod & HMRC?

Even more curious is why neither have been in touch with the PL to request access to their 'evidence', & why neither have swooped on the Etihad, slapped the bracelets on Khaldoon & carted him off in a meat wagon?
 
Last edited:
GaudinoMotors said:
Dame Dinenage - a Baroness no less, for services to the bleeding obvious and doing her job - and someone with form for condemning before a legal verdict, I think it was she, asked/intimated about whether is was fair we had expensive lawyers compared to "smaller clubs".
Click to expand...
HOW! is she allowed to make such statements??
 
Sale Moor Blue said:
What's really upsetting in all of this is the collateral damage to our reputation.
Some of the comments I read are very upsetting and border line racist.
Click to expand...
We are going to have to harness our inner 70s, 80s 90s spirit and not fold at name calling - whatever the knagaroo court outcome. We know what has happened here and what we have achieved - that's all that matters.
Ignore the jealousy and bitterness.
 
halfcenturyup said:
The rule requiring annual accounts that show a true and fair view goes back way before 2009, so the alleged breach of not providing such accounts is valid even if FFP didn't yet exist.

I imagine, though, a defence will be, what was the point?
Click to expand...
Ah, so this is it.
I await the proof they provide with interest.
One assumes they do have to provide evidence...
Perhaps this is a Kangeroo court after all.
 
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