PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[CC1]

Sorry, I wasn't meaning Stefan bud.

Yeah. Sorry, I know what you mean. My post was trying to explain to others that you didn’t think it was Stefan that was strange :) :)

 

[Stoned Rose]

Whilst most of us supporters blanched at the word relegation, I think the P.L.suits will see it differently, if they have any sense.To me the whole conversation was a wake up call to what they have potentially done. It's like they were a bullying neighbour threatening about a garden fence, and suddenly realising, the neighbour is a big multinational with more power influence and wealth than they had everdreamed of.

 

[Newman Noggs]

We saw the outrage amongst the supporters the last time that was put forward. It'd possibly kill the match going support and would owners/executives of those clubs really go down that route again?

Yes imo. Because there's been a none-too-subtle re-packaging of the ESL concept since the original announcement. The media are selling the line that if City "get off" it's because the PL isn't fit for purpose and, therefore, liverpool, united and arsenal are right to seek an alternative arrangement. And you have a couple of the most vocal and weaponised (for which read "gobshite") fanbases in football, supported by their shills in the media, claiming to have been forced to change their opinion.

 

[Bluesince1979]

No matter the outcome, we're still going to beat with the stick by moronic social media attention seekers and knuckle dragging armchair followers of the red shirt has-been's.

Once we're cleared of any serious wrong doing it'll be 'bungs' this and 'brown envelopes' that. The perception of us being cheats, in the minds of the bitter and thick won't change and we'll all still be recipients of barbed comments both online and in person.

Personally, I don't give too much of a toss what comes out of the mouth of some no-mark who has no idea what it's like to actually support a team and I imagine the same can be said for most blues.

What does really interest me though is the next move for the red shirt has-been's once we're cleared of any serious wrong doing.

Where do they go from there once they realise that we probably can't be touched for at least another decade with regard challenging for the major trophies? Another decade like the one we've just had will probably put us in a league of our own financially (domestically at least).

European Super League?

We saw the outrage amongst the supporters the last time that was put forward. It'd possibly kill the match going support and would owners/executives of those clubs really go down that route again?

Whenever i hear or see grown ups say we bribed CAS and will do the same with the prem i honestly smile. Its beyond pathetic at that stage

 

[big gaz]

Why any City fan listens to talkSPORT at all is beyond me. I literally turned it off about 10 years ago, and I have never listened to a single word since. One the best decisions I have ever made.

Maybe some of us saw who was on today and were interested as it was Stefan.
But I agree haven't missed it for years.

 

[MCFC1993]

What I don't understand is this, and maybe @projectdriver can help me out if I'm being thick.

Why are we all not going with the theory (instead of all this banging our collective heads on walls).. ...that if what we are charged with is true then the PL couldn't have charged us under football rules they would have had to report us to HMRC and the serious fraud squad?

This would surely have been a better way of explaining what's going on to all the haters and the uneducated press.

I think HMRC would come afterwards. As it stands right now HMRC are happy with our accounts. If solid evidence is presented to find us guilty, I imagine HMRC would then want to know.

That's why @projectriver has spoken about the seriousness of the charges. The Premier League aren't just saying City have lied to us. They are saying we're lying to everyone, PL, FA, FIFA, UEFA, HMRC, auditors. And in turn their accusing all the executives at the club of lying, Sheikh Mansour of lying, Soriano, Khaldoon, Etihad and all their executives, Etisalat and all their executives, other sponsors and their executives, Mancini, his agents, other agents involved with other players, numerous 3rd parties.

As Stefan has stated in a court of law it is deemed that people are truthful. So it's a huge accusation and as a result the burden of proof has to be solid and undeniable.

It's one of the biggest accusations of fraud in the history of this country. Arguably the trial is too big for the IC, the Premier League has cast its net so far wide that it's got tangled up in something way over their head. As Stefan said, a more defined accusation arguably would have stood a better chance.

2 KC'S and probably a former finance director are now left with making one of the biggest legal decisions in the history of this country. To convict they would be saying that an extraordinary amount of people and organisations have been untruthful and that verdict would have to hold up to scrutiny.

 

[Bluesince1979]

Forest won the EC when it was more difficult to win (one bad game and your out) with an elite manager, Everton have a great history.For Masters to call them "small " clubs is unforgivable and clearly illustrates his lack of professionalism

It absolutely wasnt harder to win when forest won the EC , have a look at the games played and the amount of games played to reach a final.

The knock out stage of the champs league is infinitely harder to get through.

Have a look at villas run to the final! Even easier

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It’s interesting that everything changed with a few journalists after we won the league title @ Brighton. Many in the media that season had jumped on the Klopp/Anfield /Fenway Sports bandwagon and there was a strong belief that Liverpool would finally win a title… we went on an unbelievable run (as did they) and just sneaked it…. That win put an awful lot of noses out of joint and is at the heart of Liverpool’s problem with City. Liverpool think this should have been their era and they think they should have landed a huge haul of trophies. And if it hadn’t been for City and Pep they would have done - and they really can’t take it… Pep has outperformed Klopp, our squad has outperformed theirs and whenever they have put us under pressure we have prevailed.

I have always thought that it was interesting and very suspicious that when Liverpool failed Uefa ffp in 2013/14 , they suddenly submitted further information showing that nearly £50m of those losses was spent on a stadium that was never built . First off that's a lot of money to spend with nothing to show, not even a piece of land was bought. And secondly why wasn't this huge ammount showing in the initial accounts submitted. Was this ever investigated further by the UEFA or the PL.

 

[KS55]

Not sure if I’m wording this correctly but since the crux of the charges are essentially the same as the UEFA charges (which were obviously later overturned by CAS), why would it be so difficult to prove these allegations, when we’d been found guilty before?

Also, if found guilty, we wouldn’t be able to appeal it would we?

What’s the difference between the PL case and the UEFA one? Is there a different standard of proof needed?

One essential difference is that UEFA’s investigatory chamber was corrupt.
1. CAS in our interlocutory case (CAS1) were scathing about Leterme and his handling of the case. We only lost that case because CAS ruled that they did not have jurisdiction unless the case was complete.
2. The chamber leaked confidential data to The New York Times and we know who that was.
3. Leterme was until just before the case a paid director of Bayern‘s sustainability board.
4. The contemporaneous case against PSG, also chaired by Leterme, was so corrupt in letting PSG off that the Adjudicatory chamber of UEFA actually appealed against themselves to CAS.
5. I believe UEFA subsequently dispensed with Leterme’s services.

 

[flb]

So what is the outcome for the PL, if and when we are found not guilty?

Oh, we couldn't prove it, they are probably guilty, oops, carry on as normal chaps

And the implications of probably hundreds of jobs for the local community that would go down the toilet , that alone is an absolute disgrace , for a jumped up organisation to implement hardship on a club with an extremely strong commitment to the local and wider community.

 

[big gaz]

I’ve just listened again as the signal seemed to be breaking up first time. I agree Stefan did say “objective”. Jordan is a buffoon who knows a few big words but his opinions are worthless.
Stefans point about relegation, which flew over the heads of Jordan and White, was to emphasise the enormity of he allegations and therefore the fact that to succeed the EPL have a mammoth task in proving them ergo its highly unlikely they (EPL) can succeed.
Also what gets lost in the idiotic noise is that CAS significantly reduced (by 2/3 if memory serves) the amount of the non cooperation charge which clearly demonstrates that they had some sympathy with City’s reluctance to provide documents given the circumstances.
i only listened to TS because Stefan was on and will not pollute my ear holes again unless it’s to listen to them choking on humble pie when City are, I hope to goodness cleared.
Stefan demonstrated the merit of a knowledgable lawyer with experience of this type of case as opposed to the narcissistic rambling interruptions of the goon Jordan.

The only Humble Pie you will hear is "Live at Winterland " :-)

 

[lonestay]

Mine had an entire railroad.

showing your age there ! trouble is i know what/who you are alluding too !!!!

 

[No1 was Colin bell]

Fair to say @projectriver is a bit of a geezer.

Quite. well done him I say. Hope he’s still reading after some of the misplaced criticism. Try doing live tv and radio without any misplaced words. As I know it isn’t easy. He entered the lions den and ended up as the lion tamer. A brave move as he was actually onto a loser given closed minds on that particular talkSPORT show But landed some great points. Media always going to ignore “plane lands safely” report to focus on a “possible plane crash” every time, in this case feeding the red fans.

 

[chris85mcfc]

Maybe so, but he's got a legal background too, so I suppose he's used to the underhand tactics people try and use to derail the opposition. Maybe he was in lawyer mode, as much as we would have liked him to respond differently, he's trying to be super objective about this. I see the logic in that, without that he will be dismissed because of his links and who he supports but I don't think he was expecting them to do him so dirty and misrepresent his points by only taking the soundbites they like. They have little interest in objectivity as an organisation IMO.

While we are on the subject of objectivity. Simon was so desperate to pull Stefan up on something, that he corrected him by saying 'objective' and was comfortably smug with himself about it afterwards... Which is bad enough on it's own, it's petty and unnecessary when you know what they meant. He misspeaks himself a lot and he'd take it personally if someone did that to him. He'll even complain when someone interrupts him back... He has everything his way on that platform.

The thing is, having listened back to what Stefan said, I'm fairly certain he said "but someone that's objective" after all, it was Simon who misheard it because of how fast it was spoken.

Maybe it's just me though, what do you hear?:


Whopper either way.

Somebody thatsobjective is how it left his mouth

Quite clearly he says that's objective, but the way it came out it could be heard as being subjective purely because of the 's' at the end of thats!

 

[tweety]

Stefan did a longer version of this yesterday on an Arsenal podcast which you might enjoy, I watched it after he tweeted it out yesterday:



The Arsenal fan doesn't know enough to be able to bounce back with any informative/good questions but Stefan gives out a lot of information.

A excellent podcast and well worth a watch. My takeaway from it is the total incompetence of the Premier league, they seem hell bent on destroying the most popular league in the world over imo restrictive financial regulations. Relegation this season will be a complete nonsense.

 

[mancboy]

It absolutely wasnt harder to win when forest won the EC , have a look at the games played and the amount of games played to reach a final.

The knock out stage of the champs league is infinitely harder to get through.

Have a look at villas run to the final! Even easier

Yeah but back in those days it was lose and ur done, these days u could concievably lose 3 games in the group stages and another 3 in the knockouts and still make the final, i mean we didnt lose a game so wed have been fine in both eras ;)

 

[Cumbie Blue]

Little nugget in there that always seems to get missed, is that we topped up from £8 million each year (if these allegations are correct).

That would be the best, best value for money sponsorship for kit, academy campus, stadium name over the years in question in sports history.

Did we top up or did we just get a greater share of the £400 mil guaranteed over the 10 years quicker then a consistent £40 mil per year to move the club forward and get better value for the sponsorship? Unless the payment schedule is set and could not be altered so long as the total did not exceed £400 mil what's the problem here?

That seems to be fine and done by Arsenal with the Emirates deal as well it seems from another poster. Gave a sponsor the opportunity to get onboard a long term project at a value that reflected a fair deal for both parties based on objectives and sitting as was in 2009/2010 (top 8 EPL club, UEFA participants with greater ambitions).

Agree that when you look at what United's sponsors paid this period what a bargain!

 

[KS55]

Stefan was more certain of our likely defeating of the charges than he had been previously, I thought.
Note to Klopp: When we are cleared, if you say “It is a bad day for football” you will be banned from the Etihad and have your balls chopped off.
Rather, you should say: “Bollocks, City’s proven innocence means Pep will stay and that’s another five years without the title for us”
Karma.

 

[paulchapo]

Why are you surprised?? If not that comment, they would have found another way of writing a negative headline. But they can’t hide the fact that there are now chinks forming in the PL attitude & approach AND the comments by Stefan relating to the seriousness of the PL’s accusations are now starting to be aired (even if hidden in a lower paragraph)

Yes it's a ridiculous notion that so many respected and qualified people, over a ten year period, all lied and colluded to commit fraud. This is basically what they're implying. Not only that but all their legal experts who checked our books were so incompetent they missed it. The best thing the premier league could do would be to back out now as they could be royally fucked. Or better still tell the truth that the only reason they started this shitshow was because the Yanks and the redshirts begged them to do so.

 

[Bozo]

Maybe so, but he's got a legal background too, so I suppose he's used to the underhand tactics people try and use to derail the opposition. Maybe he was in lawyer mode, as much as we would have liked him to respond differently, he's trying to be super objective about this. I see the logic in that, without that he will be dismissed because of his links and who he supports but I don't think he was expecting them to do him so dirty and misrepresent his points by only taking the soundbites they like. They have little interest in objectivity as an organisation IMO.

While we are on the subject of objectivity. Simon was so desperate to pull Stefan up on something, that he corrected him by saying 'objective' and was comfortably smug with himself about it afterwards... Which is bad enough on it's own, it's petty and unnecessary when you know what they meant. He misspeaks himself a lot and he'd take it personally if someone did that to him. He'll even complain when someone interrupts him back... He has everything his way on that platform.

The thing is, having listened back to what Stefan said, I'm fairly certain he said "but someone that's objective" after all, it was Simon who misheard it because of how fast it was spoken.

Maybe it's just me though, what do you hear?:


Whopper either way.

What a major, major prick Simon Jordan is.