PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Silva2021]

Of course Everton fans are moaning what about City, very few people take the time or some I don’t mean to sound rude, will have the mental capacity to understand it.

Then they take their lead from the likes of Dyche, Carragher, Jordan etc.

Unfortunately, blaming them is like blaming people who voted for Brexit as they believed the NHS would get an extra £300 million a week. This was never going to be the case and if you went into the finer detail (few ever do, too busy, don’t care enough about it). There maybe other reasons etc. and there are pros and cons (I’m not after opening that Pandora’s box). But to have something on the side of a bus as a main pledge knowing it would never be the case is bad IMO.

The issue in all of this is not the people, but more to do with the fact people with influence are allowed to say stuff they know to be untrue to try and influence situations for their benefit.

Unfortunately, this is the case in a lot more then just football.

As of today, I am sure our lawyers are watching with interest and I’m sure someone at the PL is thinking, why did we do this (UEFA had it covered, we didn’t need our own).

 

[I'm Blue]

There was one on Talk shite an hour ago calling from Europe saying what about City with no evidence and just pure venom !

There’s plenty of them out there.
I ain’t bothered, it was expected.
I find it funny these days.
There’s that much venom directed at City from ‘these Arab's, oil money, empty seats, other clubs failings’ the list goes on and on.
But remember “no one cares about City” : )

 

[Ric]

I don't think this decision will have any real bearing on our case. Seen a few people express concern about the legal mistakes that have been made but I'm sure any similar errors against us will be ripped to shreds by our legal team. Besides, anything that undermines the credibility of the commission might not be a bad thing from our perspective.

 

[TShed]

What intrigues me is the PL clearly by reducing a punishment have no policy yet alone processes they just react. The fact they have admitted whatever Everton have done is not “as serious” then I’d love Everton to take them to task claiming rightly or not that they have lost revenues since the 10 point reduction just like we should have done with UEFA. Wishful thinking but it’s clearly not in the Sheiks culture to seek revenge and retribution but it’s well in mine I’d fuckin nail every fuckers hat on who has crossed our path since the charges once we are proven to be innocent.
In the words of one of Stalybridges finest …”fuck em … fuck the lot of them” ref Dave Lee RIP

 

[halfcenturyup]

Any of our lawyers on here think "legal errors" is a particularly strange thing to say? Rather than say the appeals panel, for example, took a more lenient view of some of the mitigating factors.

Isn't it weird for an appeals panel chosen by the chairman of the judicial panel to say that an "independent" panel chosen by the same guy made two legal errors in a small number of findings. Doesn't reflect very well on anybody, imho.

Legal errors!

 

[Iassel]

Looks pretty damning again for Masters.

Not sure about that - whilst Masters is obviously a bit of a cockwomble, he has absolutely zero to do with the tribunal process.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

“The appeal board concluded that the independent commission's initial ruling in November 2023 ‘made legal errors’ on two grounds.”

That is not reassuring.

It is in a way as it has been brought up on appeal and they found them to be in the wrong.

That’s a positive if our commission make legal errors.

 

[I'm Blue]

I don't think this decision will have any real bearing on our case. Seen a few people express concern about the legal mistakes that have been made but I'm sure any similar errors against us will be ripped to shreds by our legal team. Besides, anything that undermines the credibility of the commission might not be a bad thing from our perspective.

I took it as a positive that there’s legal mistakes.
The PL already made mistakes when first issuing our charges, as pointed out by our legal team.
Any lawyer/KC worth his salt would be on that quicker than flies on a scum fan : )

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

So the senior leadership at the PL is still privately briefing the media in advance (or someone on the so-called independent panel) with confidential information which could financially impact on all clubs, especially those in the relegation zone. And apparently City are supposed to trust the PL and this corrupt process.

Everton had the result sent to them last Monday, so they knew before Ornstein. It just wasn’t made public.

 

[bluenova]

Any of our lawyers on here think "legal errors" is a particularly strange thing to say? Rather than say the appeals panel, for example, took a more lenient view of some of the mitigating factors.

Isn't it weird for an appeals panel chosen by the chairman of the judicial panel to say that an "independent" panel chosen by the same guy made two legal errors in a small number of findings. Doesn't reflect very well on anybody, imho.

Legal errors!

Not a lawyer, but is it at the stage that you can only appeal on "legal errors"?

Sure I read that no new evidence could be presented, which means they're not retrying the case, they are only arguing that the original decision was made incorrectly.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Not sure about that - whilst Masters is obviously a bit of a cockwomble, he has absolutely zero to do with the tribunal process.

Buck stops with him, I am afraid.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Not a lawyer, but is it at the stage that you can only appeal on "legal errors"?

Sure I read that no new evidence could be presented, which means they're not retrying the case, they are only arguing that the original decision was made incorrectly.

Iirc, and I may not, I don't have the handbook to hand, you can appeal the IC decision on any grounds. Everton, however, accepted the breach, but contested the sanction.

There is a next process in front of a really independent tribunal where the arbitrators are chosen by both parties, like at CAS. I think this is the one that can only be activated on very limited grounds, one being an error of law.

Which is why I am surprised they used the "legal error" wording in the finding. They have set a precedent for legal errors on their very first case ....

Or this could all be bollocks. :)

 

[KS55]

I will bet all my money I have that our legal team have used phrases and words that masters has never even heard of, let alone spell.

Con-fid-ential
Fair-ness
Organ-ised
Leg-al
Foot-ball

 

[wolviedinho]

Not sure about that - whilst Masters is obviously a bit of a cockwomble, he has absolutely zero to do with the tribunal process.

Really? How do you know that for certain?

Collusion is not an allusion-:)

 

[Scaley]

There’s plenty of them out there.
I ain’t bothered, it was expected.
I find it funny these days.
There’s that much venom directed at City from ‘these Arab's, oil money, empty seats, other clubs failings’ the list goes on and on.
But remember “no one cares about City” : )

Spot on….tens of thousands posting daily on social media declaring how they don’t care about City with the irony totally lost on the balloons.

 

[bladdered]

 

[jrb]

Masters.

”Can somebody turn the heating down in my office please, I feel very hot and I’m sweating”

Reply.

”There’s no heating on Richard”

”It must be you”

 

[Stoned Rose]

Bbc deleted this tweet can't even do maths.View attachment 108242

Aluko likes this

 

[Stoned Rose]

Not sure about that - whilst Masters is obviously a bit of a cockwomble, he has absolutely zero to do with the tribunal process.

Yeah but what will he be thinking in 12 months?

 

[Mr Fraser]

Not sure about that - whilst Masters is obviously a bit of a cockwomble, he has absolutely zero to do with the tribunal process.

As the top man he carries the can