PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I’m struggling to believe this myself, but we’re currently watching one of greatest teams in the history of football. Pep is a genius.

Any blue who’s watched us for 30+ years will understand how incredible this is. Especially after the pain of years and years of seeing the rags winning everything.

I can’t think of any team who’s had the journey we’ve had.

We all know the charges are bs. I honestly wouldn’t care if we get relegated to the Sunday league. Imagine if that happens and Pep stays? What tf will we get charged with then?
 
Centurions said:
UEFA only monitor clubs that have failed FFP in the first place to ensure that they're moving in the right direction, since united haven't failed the PL's PSR (so far at least) they wouldn't be announcing they're monitoring them. I'm not even sure they do it regardless. The first part of your post is just nonsensical speculation, whether you're having it or not. Oh, and their thread is in general football BTW.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, take your point on UEFA only announcing ongoing monitoring for clubs under a settlement regime.

But saying my assumptions are nonsensical speculation is going a bit far. They may be wrong, but they aren't nonsensical.
 
SSL2 said:
1 year to the day

Click to expand...

Only a year it feels like more?
Anyway I'm off out to get a cake with 1 candle to celebrate, might even do a bit of a song too!
 
BerkshireBlue said:
plus this isn't about cities charge this is about United escape one. The should be charged with " member clubs must comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations"
Click to expand...
Shouldn't that apply to every club who has been found in breach of UEFA's FFP regs down the years? From us (in 2014) to Hull City to Wolves to Chelsea, as well as United?
 
M18CTID said:
Shouldn't that apply to every club who has been found in breach of UEFA's FFP regs down the years? From us (in 2014) to Hull City to Wolves to Chelsea, as well as United?
Click to expand...

But how could it logically?
If UEFA's loss limit is £35m, and the PL's is £105m (sorry, cant remember if those are exact numbers) , then by default if the PL charge someone that fails UEFA, then their £105m limit is redundant.
 
jockblue said:
But how could it logically?
If UEFA's loss limit is £35m, and the PL's is £105m (sorry, cant remember if those are exact numbers) , then by default if the PL charge someone that fails UEFA, then their £105m limit is redundant.
Click to expand...
Not if the rule says "must comply with UEFA". It doesnt matter what the limits are?
 
halfcenturyup said:
Fair enough, take your point on UEFA only announcing ongoing monitoring for clubs under a settlement regime.

But saying my assumptions are nonsensical speculation is going a bit far. They may be wrong, but they aren't nonsensical.
Click to expand...
It is given that nobody outside of the people who should know have access to the actual figures, so posting they must have failed is nonsensical. Everything after that just follows on from a (possibly) incorrect assumption.

On an aside and not pointed at you, why are people finding it difficult to distinguish between UEFA and PL charges plus failing FFP and being charged with deliberately misleading UEFA and the PL? I blame the modern disease of whataboutery. People seem to have stopped using their own brains and believe whatever some no-mark on Twitter tells them without just pausing a moment and thinking about the actual facts.
 
BerkshireBlue said:
Why mention FFP specifically in the charge then
Click to expand...
Because PL are the FFP licensors for their clubs.

If we've submitted deliberately mis-stated accounts to support our FFP licence then we've broken a PL rule, regardless of what the financial impact from a pure FFP point of view would have been if we'd submitted "accurate" accounts.

So even if "accurate" accounts would still have seen us pass FFP, my understanding is that we'd still potentially be in breach of our requirement to submit true and fair accounts.
 
cheekybids said:
And the reporting making out we got off on a technicality.
Click to expand...
The "technicality" being that there was no evidence.

To me the statement of having no evidence is not a technicality, it is a simple matter of fact. But these cunts can't or won't accept facts, they try to justify their false claims failing by claiming "technicalities".
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Because PL are the FFP licensors for their clubs.

If we've submitted deliberately mis-stated accounts to support our FFP licence then we've broken a PL rule, regardless of what the financial impact from a pure FFP point of view would have been if we'd submitted "accurate" accounts.

So even if "accurate" accounts would still have seen us pass FFP, my understanding is that we'd still potentially be in breach of our requirement to submit true and fair accounts.
Click to expand...

I'll simplify the question for you.

Have United broke this Premier League rule "member clubs must comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations"?
 
Centurions said:
It is given that nobody outside of the people who should know have access to the actual figures, so posting they must have failed is nonsensical. Everything after that just follows on from a (possibly) incorrect assumption.

On an aside and not pointed at you, why are people finding it difficult to distinguish between UEFA and PL charges plus failing FFP and being charged with deliberately misleading UEFA and the PL? I blame the modern disease of whataboutery. People seem to have stopped using their own brains and believe whatever some no-mark on Twitter tells them without just pausing a moment and thinking about the actual facts.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep talking about United on here? They have their own thread. :)
 
halfcenturyup said:
Why do you keep talking about United on here? They have their own thread. :)
Click to expand...
the reason he's posting about United is that there's only one team in the history of the premier league that has been charged with breaking

"member clubs must comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations"

When at least another 3 premier league teams have broken the above rule without charge, most recently United.
 
BerkshireBlue said:
I'll simplify the question for you.

Have United broke this Premier League rule "member clubs must comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations"?
Click to expand...
Well they failed FFP of course but my understanding was that was down to a disagreement over what they could claim for Covid-related losses. That's somewhat different to submitting false accounts. As much as we'd love to see them being treated like us or Everton, I wouldn't expect the PL to enforce that rule in those circumstances (i.e. a genuine difference of opinion).

However Everton got docked 10 points because they interpreted the allowable exclusions to PSR calculations rather imaginatively.

We don't know what the specific issue with united was but if they'd clearly tried it on then I'd have expected action from the PL.
 
Last edited:
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