PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[halfcenturyup]

I'm sure they will find a way

It's OK. Our lawyers are bigger than their lawyers :)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Some of the payments made to the club's managers and players were made by external companies because they were contracted that way (Mancini had a separate contract in AD/ image rights were "outsourced" to a third party). Presumably after tax and legal clearances. Those contracts, as far as we know, were properly recorded in the accounts.

I'd just point out in response to your otherwise excellent post that the point is that, by virtue of the payments being paid by third parties, they won't have been recorded in City's accounts. The main question, certainly as far as the image rights payments are concerned, is were they properly reported to the PL/UEFA?

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

The same idiots that are convinced the problems in Paris were all UEFAs fault.

Given UEFA's role in the shambles that was the Ataturk, I'm not convinced there's much mileage in continuing to lay the Paris debacle at the door of our loveable Scouse chums....regardless of how much previous they've got!

 

[cheekybids]

Three non-English players actually!

It’s not really talked about is it……

 

[ysmsa]

TS have but not a big showing elsewhere, certainly not in print media

Social media though which dwarfs the printed press nowadays

 

[Big Joe Corrigan]

Given UEFA's role in the shambles that was the Ataturk, I'm not convinced there's much mileage in continuing to lay the Paris debacle at the door of our loveable Scouse chums....regardless of how much previous they've got!

You are joking?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I'm not up for exchanging essays. The PL have made the massive claim around sponsors (as UEFA did) and the case is primarily about that. The IC will take a dim view of the PL not being able to make out that claim which will infect the rest. Furthermore, the other matters are not even in play unless the PL can show a level of deliberate concealment to get round the statute of limitations. I think Fordham is generally very uninteresting and far too public (Companies House etc) to be prosecuted in 2024/25.

But obviously if only a tiny part of the claim is proved, the sanctions will be far less than if the sponsorship sham allegation is proved. Obviously.

Sorry - I didn't realise it was you I was replying to. The point I was (somewhat longwindedly) trying to make was that we could still be found to have breached some of the 115 charges, but not acted fraudulently or in an attempt to mislead. So maybe acted within the letter of the law but not the spirit.

 

[cheekybids]

Given UEFA's role in the shambles that was the Ataturk, I'm not convinced there's much mileage in continuing to lay the Paris debacle at the door of our loveable Scouse chums....regardless of how much previous they've got!

Imagine if it was the Scousers in Istanbul….

It’s the whitewashing that the events were exacerbated by the forgers & jibbers.

 

[ysmsa]

No, no, no they have not convinced people we are guilty, they have convinced idiots we are guilty, they have convinced the same idiots who believed us and the dippers shared the last 6 titles, they have convinced the same idiots that believed that the rags had a genuine shot at the champions league, it is not hard to convince these morons of anything as they want to believe it, they want to believe that its not mismanagement by their clubs and that they arent quite good enough, they want to believe it in the same way that they want to believe that if it wasnt for that knee injury theyd have made it and played in the premier league and that they are the funniest person in the office and everyone is laughing with them not at them, they havent convinced anyone with half a brain of anything, its just unfortunate that as with most things the vocal idiot minority make the loudest noise.

True, hopefully

But, idiots outnumber sensible a million to 1.

And, bizarrely, Dippers have managed to convince "sensible people" they are never at fault for anything!

 

[Rory Bluelow]

Actually there might be something in that.

Should a team that is in the premier league for just 1 year in the last 10 have the same voting rights as an ever present like Everton? Maybe, maybe not.

Should Everton get relegated should they lose all voting rights immediately?

Maybe it should be proportional. Maybe you get 1 vote for each of the rolling last 10 years you were in the premier league. So City, Spurs, Chelsea, Everton, Newcastle, Palace would all currently get 10 votes each whereas Burnley would get 8 votes and Forest would get 2 votes.

Not sold on that idea, but it's still the case that no one team gets more than 1/20 of the total vote.

No. I think that would be very dangerous.

 

[Eric Hitchmough]

True, hopefully

But, idiots outnumber sensible a million to 1.

And, bizarrely, Dippers have managed to convince "sensible people" they are never at fault for anything!

People are terrified of offending them, including our club unfortunately, hence the joint apology we issued when their ‘fans’ injured a teenage female Blue, and accepting a £1m settlement when they hacked our IT system.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Sorry - I didn't realise it was you I was replying to. The point I was (somewhat longwindedly) trying to make was that we could still be found to have breached some of the 115 charges, but not acted fraudulently or in an attempt to mislead. So maybe acted within the letter of the law but not the spirit.

The classic accountant / lawyer conflict: substance over form.

 

[Lord Blue]

No. I think that would be very dangerous.

fair enough.

although giving the dippers and the rags more voting power than everton or forest as Parry, in the original post, suggested would be way more dangerous.

it was just a passing thought tbh. thought i'd put it out there.

 

[Mr Fraser]

Actually there might be something in that.

Should a team that is in the premier league for just 1 year in the last 10 have the same voting rights as an ever present like Everton? Maybe, maybe not.

Should Everton get relegated should they lose all voting rights immediately?

Maybe it should be proportional. Maybe you get 1 vote for each of the rolling last 10 years you were in the premier league. So City, Spurs, Chelsea, Everton, Newcastle, Palace would all currently get 10 votes each whereas Burnley would get 8 votes and Forest would get 2 votes.

Not sold on that idea, but it's still the case that no one team gets more than 1/20 of the total vote.

A world where "Some are more equal than others". There's a word for that

 

[citizen_maine]

Sorry - I didn't realise it was you I was replying to. The point I was (somewhat longwindedly) trying to make was that we could still be found to have breached some of the 115 charges, but not acted fraudulently or in an attempt to mislead. So maybe acted within the letter of the law but not the spirit.

Can you be done for not acting in the spirit of the rules?

 

[WRicko]

I'd just point out in response to your otherwise excellent post that the point is that, by virtue of the payments being paid by third parties, they won't have been recorded in City's accounts. The main question, certainly as far as the image rights payments are concerned, is were they properly reported to the PL/UEFA?

Why would we need to report stuff that’s outside the club ? Unless it’s not a related party company within the company it would be like Nike reporting to PL UEFA payments to players

 

[silva_is_gold]

The Super League was created in tantrum against UEFA’s inability to neutralise ‘nation state’ investment or ownership so they wouldn’t have us. UAE pro league or create some more clubs to play us maybe? Bring it on

I’m being mocked by someone. Turned up for my son’s swim/run competition today and he’s number 115. Wankers

He better win then ;)

 

[spinney]

A world where "Some are more equal than others". There's a word for that

but the money is divi'd up by finishing position, which i think is what parry is edging towards with his( gills ) brainwave

 

[Lord Blue]

A world where "Some are more equal than others". There's a word for that

that's already the case.

the idea was more like proportional representation. everton could spend 1 year out of 20 in the championship and in that 1 year there could be a vote that impacts them hugely. currently it would be a case of tough cheese.

the bigger problem for me is that over a period of 10 years there might be 30 different teams at one time or another in the premier league so to get them all around a table chipping in might be a disaster.

 

[Bez]

I've thought about this quite a bit. The utter disregard for the mental health of some supporters caused by a relentless public display of slander and hatred in the media towards an entity that they genuinely love and have so much emotion invested in. It's like having a family member being slagged in the media all day every day with no actual event having been settled or proven. It's preposterous that they can get away with this unceasing policy of slander and IMO it's not a stretch to say that it's causing personal damage to some and that those doing this should be held accountable...

Totally agree. The communication and approach to the alleged charges by the PL since 2019 has been nothing short of woeful. They should be held to account for the negative impact they have had on fans due to their total mismanagement of the case against City. Especially after the allegations have already been tried once via CAS. UEFA was a kangaroo court so that does not count as a proper process.