PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Gordyola said:
The PL have a KC Murray Rosen as the chair of the judicial panel Known to be an Arsenal fan
He will appoint the IC probably not sit on it
www.4newsquare.com

Murray Rosen KC appointed by the Premier League Clubs as the first Chair of their new Judicial Panel

The Premier League has created a new Judicial Panel of 15 members, plus an Appeal Panel of 6 members, to adjudicate independently disciplinary cases referred to it by the Premier League Board and to resolve disputes between Clubs and Managers by way of arbitration. Murray Rosen KC has been...
www.4newsquare.com www.4newsquare.com
Click to expand...
The fact that The Premier League makes these appointments is completely backwards. They are the ones making the accusation, they should have no control or input into the trial process. They are acting as judge, jury and executioner. Nothing about this process is independent. Add to that the fact that, the way the organisation exists today, The Premier League really is just it's own member clubs, i.e. our direct rivals, and it amounts to a massive conflict of interest.

Much the same problem as the Post Office having it's own powers of prosecution.

There's been a problem with corporate incest in the governance of football for a long time. The game in general needs a huge shake-up in how it's run, and who runs it.
 
paska said:
The fact that The Premier League makes these appointments is completely backwards. They are the ones making the accusation, they should have no control or input into the trial process. They are acting as judge, jury and executioner. Nothing about this process is independent. Add to that the fact that, the way the organisation exists today, The Premier League really is just it's own member clubs, i.e. our direct rivals, and it amounts to a massive conflict of interest.

Much the same problem as the Post Office having it's own powers of prosecution.

There's been a problem with corporate incest in the governance of football for a long time. The game in general needs a huge shake-up in how it's run, and who runs it.
Click to expand...

You may well be right, we will have to wait and see.

But the PL rules do finally allow for arbitration. I have attached the relevant rules concerning the process, its place in law, the acceptable reasons for arbitration, and the selection of the arbitrators below. So there is recourse, in the circumstances set out below, for arbitration with arbitrators not associated with the PL. But, our legal guys on here say that there is next to no chance the club will go to arbitration claiming that, for example, the independent commission and the appeals board hadn't applied their minds properly to the facts of the case.

I am fully prepared to be blasted again, but I would imagine, as part of the preparation for the independent commission, there are some expensive lawyers considering right now on what grounds the club can appeal first to an appeals board and then to a really independent arbitration panel.

My loins are girded.

PL Arbitration2.jpg
 
Last edited:
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
What’s wrong with buying a football club and using it as a vehicle to promote something. Every one now knows what Etihad do, is it that much of an inflated sponsorship with the exposure they have had since 2009?
Click to expand...
Leicester have managed to get fortunes in from King Power to advertise their…duty free shops that don’t need advertising as they’ve got a captive audience of airline travellers.

Has anyone, ever, chosen what duty free shop they visited?
 
leithblue said:
Leicester have managed to get fortunes in from King Power to advertise their…duty free shops that don’t need advertising as they’ve got a captive audience of airline travellers.

Has anyone, ever, chosen what duty free shop they visited?
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
paska said:
The fact that The Premier League makes these appointments is completely backwards. They are the ones making the accusation, they should have no control or input into the trial process. They are acting as judge, jury and executioner. Nothing about this process is independent. Add to that the fact that, the way the organisation exists today, The Premier League really is just it's own member clubs, i.e. our direct rivals, and it amounts to a massive conflict of interest.

Much the same problem as the Post Office having it's own powers of prosecution.

There's been a problem with corporate incest in the governance of football for a long time. The game in general needs a huge shake-up in how it's run, and who runs it.
Click to expand...

PL isn’t even a decent members club. 3 or 4 members wield all the power and tell the other 16 what’s good for them.
 
halfcenturyup said:
FAQs maybe, like:

What are the charges?
Do they represent fraud?
If it's fraud why isn't this in a criminal court?
Do the allegations imply breaching FFP?
Are any of the Pl allegations time-barred?
What is Etihad about?
What is Etisalat about?
What is Mancini's contract about?
What is the image rights issue?
How long will it take?
What is likely to happen?

And general background:
When was FFP introduced by UEFA and the PL?
What are UEFA's FFP rules?
What are the PL's FFP rules?
What was the 2014 settlement about?
Why was the club banned from the CL in 2019?
What did CAS say about UEFA's case?

Edit: I could volunteer to make a start on some of them if people think it is a good idea. Would have to be checked by people smarter than me, of course. @Ric , what do you think?
Click to expand...
Would work for me!

As much as I want to ignore it all, unfortunately it’s hanging over our heads so would be good to have a bit more insight into some of it
 
christopp said:
Would work for me!

As much as I want to ignore it all, unfortunately it’s hanging over our heads so would be good to have a bit more insight into some of it
Click to expand...
forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk

115 Charges - FAQs

Mods, this has been a request on and off in the 115 Charges thread for some time. Feel free to move but I thought it might warrant a thread of its own. The idea here is that the information is essentially factual with very little/no opinion thrown into the mix. There are also some significant...
forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk
 
So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?
 
eastlandsblue said:
So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?
Click to expand...

I don't remember him saying that we'd know in a week.
I thought he said that he couldn't say what the date is.
 
eastlandsblue said:
So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?
Click to expand...
Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown
 
chaddblue said:
Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown
Click to expand...

I don't think that was it either.

I don't think Ceferin said anything out of line - he basically said that the process followed had been right - and he isn't going to get involved in a PL matter that is unproven. I doubt even more that Masters knew that Ceferin was going to say something days later.

Maybe Masters expected something which didn't happen, or was just taking rubbish.
 
chaddblue said:
Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown
Click to expand...
Masters said he couldn’t say when the hearing would be, but it was progressing.

It was the Torygraph who claimed there would be major developments the following week regarding City. All that happened was the Ceferin quotes appeared in their publication.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
I don't think that was it either.

I don't think Ceferin said anything out of line - he basically said that the process followed had been right - and he isn't going to get involved in a PL matter that is unproven. I doubt even more that Masters knew that Ceferin was going to say something days later.

Maybe Masters expected something which didn't happen, or was just taking rubbish.
Click to expand...

Much as I hate to say it, to be fair to Masters he didn't say anything about new information in a week, did he? That was the newspaper that had the Ceferin "exclusive".
 
Dribble said:
Masters said he couldn’t say when the hearing would be, but it was progressing.

It was the Torygraph who claimed there would be major developments the following week regarding City. All that happened was the Ceferin quotes appeared in their publication.
Click to expand...

What he said.
 
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