PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BringBackSwales]

First time I have listened to harris what a knobhead. Wouldnr except that the red tops plus spurs are been it all lol

First class Projectriver.

I'm still worried the pl must have something big because if they havent this is embarrassing for the pl the brand, everything. Pl will self implode.

I still think City are innocent but cant get my head around why the pl brought this case

Probably not. The PL brought the case because masters was under pressure from united liverpool arsenal spurs etc

 

[give it to gordon]

Probably not. The PL brought the case because masters was under pressure from united liverpool arsenal spurs etc

Can it really be that simple ?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

This may be worth a listen - me v Nick Harris on the excellent Unofficial Partner podcast...

Downloaded that for my trip to the NEC tomorrow. Although I'm not sure whether I'll be able to keep going in a straight line when Harris comes out with his usual bollocks.

 

[oakiecokie]

The pl brought this under pressure from the cartel. Either way the cartel are on a winner. City win the case, the pl is destroyed and opens the door for the super league without City. City lose, the cartel have got rid of us.

I`ve read some shit on this thread but by far and away that tops the fucking lot.

 

[hgblue]

£100 million a year from Etihad will get some piss boiling and probably why the Premier League are trying to change the rules on related parties. If you look at it Etihad are getting very good exposure from their association from the club, they are posting record profits so why can’t they throw some extra money City’s way in sponsorships.

I guess ten years ago you could have argued that the sponsorship deal was over valued. However, in hindsight it was an absolutely inspired piece of business by Etihad. Just imagine how much our brand recognition has increased since that deal was signed and how beneficial that association has been to Etihad. How much would they have had to pay in advertising to reach that many people and have such a positive impact? Harris is in possession of these facts but seems not to want to take them into account. Why are these journalists so desperate to see City get screwed over?

 

[give it to gordon]

It's becomes a problem when Company B then signs a contract to always fully disclose how much sponsorship income they get every year under threat of being punished if they don't.

Yea but what's it got to do with other companies ?

Who decides what's a fair price ? For example rags will always think their sponsorship should be more than little old City

 

[wolviedinho]

This may be worth a listen - me v Nick Harris on the excellent Unofficial Partner podcast...

Top class performance. Fair unbiased view from Stefan. Harris tried to bate him on the email and the CAS 3 man panel.

Harris is wrong on his original claim that city broke ffp instead both parties agreed to a settlement. City themselves have denied breaking the rules and up to now we have no reason to doubt them.

The constant claim that city appointed 2 members at CAS is also wrong. UEFA had every right to say no we want another person to sit. They did not so nothing to see here, right? No wrong again!

The “layman view” is the overall takeaway from me:

City broke ffp rules- The media have driven the narrative to only include yes or no. Now that it’s with legal it will be complicated and not straightforward due to legal and accounting complexities.

Same with City are Cheats narrative. Again the media push for a yes or no. CAS said “no evidence” instead of accepting the prevailing view the conspiracies started, bribed them, 2 members on the panel etc.

The email looks bad on the face of it and any “layman” reading it would jump to something dodgy going on. When City presented the full picture to an independent CAS they again said no evidence of wrong doing on 11 occasions.

So what we have is layman scandalisation from bias agents acting in their own self interest, that includes Munich, Madrid, Barca, united, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea, spurs etc using the sporting bodies to stop City competing and taking away their revenue and future fans.

Overall, a settlement between city and the premier league should have happened before it got to this point. City must be emboldened by the CAS verdict to say “bring it on”. The leagues motives are not clear, maybe they generally are being used by the Red clubs and maybe they want to stop an independent regulator and by stopping city they can achieve both aims. Will the brand be damaged or will it be enough that Masters goes and becomes another twisted Tebas.

Either way, the league is changing again just like it did in 92 and with the super league backdrop. It’s anyone’s guess what happens next.

On City, the league don’t seem to have evidence to back up their claim. The standard of proof is very high according to our legal experts.

I still think that once the evidence is put forward a settlement will be reached before the judgment is decided. It’s the only way both parties can win and lose. Tho I am only a layman so I could be wrong. I will wait to read from the medias unbiased truth seekers opinions once we thump United.

 

[failsworthblueboy]

In fairness to Harris, I had no issue with his behaviour on this podcast. He was giving his opinion and making points and doing so in a largely non-inflammatory manner. If he could bring this attitude across into his social media posts, instead of the sensationalist nonsense he spews to garner clicks and likes from the red mafia, he actually might almost be worth listening to on this subject.

Each to their own my friend but I personally have no interest in fairness to Harris he tries to drag us through the gutter every chance he gets. I suspect his behavior was curtailed somewhat by the caliber of opponent,

 

[KS55]

Stefan explained it expertly this morning on TS emphasising the word profit. It's a shame that there are so many Muppets in the media chatting shit about FFP when they are utterly clueless and the masses lap it up.

It turned out that UEFA didnt understand their own rules, City too got them wrong. What chance journos who never read anything properly?

 

[Newman Noggs]

Wow, he's got 200 subscribers. Impressive.

 

[Gordyola]

Harris is blinded by his hatred, he calls himself an investigative journalist trouble is he looks for evidence that in the slightest way supports his already determined conclusion
He’s just made himself look a total clown, virtually all the things he said were countered and corrected by Stefan
One example being his claim that City chose two of the CAS judges unfortunately for him Stefan explained the facts

 

[manimanc]

@projectriver
That was a good listen, very factual and entertaining listening to you correct that goggle eyed prick countless times.
He came across as bitter imo, it was like the idiots on twitter coming out with absolutely nothing to do with proceedings.
Do you know what team he follows? Might explain his slapped arse take on all things city. If he classes himself as a journalist then that profession is well and truly in the gutter.

Thanks for putting it up, there's nothing more heart warming than listening to a blue who knows what they are on about.

 

[KS55]

I thought it was a Spiegel email.
As was pointed out, an email in isolation doesn't mean much (e.g. if the reply is "no, no, no, you can't do that")

I’m pretty sure that if a manager tried to submit an account that was clearly wrong, it would be rejected and never find its way onto the P&L. I have never seen this mentioned by any media, as though a stand alone email could tell the whole story.

 

[Gordyola]

Each to their own my friend but I personally have no interest in fairness to Harris he tries to drag us through the gutter every chance he gets. I suspect his behavior was curtailed somewhat by the caliber of opponent,

Exactly he will go on other podcasts and continue to spout lies repeating the inaccuracies disproven by Stefan hate runs though his veins he’s a sad man

 

[KS55]

Interesting point re profits needed. Not many who've appreciated. Maybe Cole will be packing his bags again.

I think Chelsea, determined to regain their former level, simply decided to take a fine, but points deduction finally reared their head which, I expect, came as a shock to them.

 

[Paladin]

It said on talksport they faced 9 charges 7 still guilty of 2 they are now not

They appealed on nine separate grounds. Seven of those grounds for appeal were dismissed, two were upheld. These weren't based on the original charges. They were based on what Everton's lawyers thought were errors in the original judgement.

I don't think we know exactly how many charges were brought against Everton. The PL charged them for failing FFP, and there were eight separate Profit and Sustainability rules in the 2021-22 PL handbook (numbered E45 to E52).

In our case, the PL accuse us of breaking each rule for each year, so E45, E46, E47, E48, E49, E50, E52 and E52 (or their equivalent in each year). That's a heck of a lot of charges when detailed individually, as they did with us.

This was sensationalism by the PL, and it has attracted a lot of attention. They could have accused City of failing FFP for each of ten seasons - ten charges for FFP. Instead they have made it appear that Everton has committed one P&S beach, whilst we have something like 45. Very disingenuous by the PL, and they accuse us of acting in bad faith.

Also, the commission looking into the Everton case found them guilty of breaking rule B15 - not acting in good faith. Everyone assumed that the PL had charged Everton under B15 also, which would have made at least two charges. However, on appeal, it transpired that the PL didn't even bring this charge against Everton. This is surprising, given that by all accounts, the PL warned Everton that they were in danger of failing P&S rules, but they carried on regardless. Sounds like bad faith to me.

So what it boils down to is we don't know how many rules Everton are accused of breaking, because they PL hasn't published a list, like they did with us.

If anyone is acting in bad faith, it seems the PL is.

 

[dadnlad]

Yea but what's it got to do with other companies ?

Who decides what's a fair price ? For example rags will always think their sponsorship should be more than little old City

Gary Neville the way he goes on about our finances

 

[KS55]

£100 million a year from Etihad will get some piss boiling and probably why the Premier League are trying to change the rules on related parties. If you look at it Etihad are getting very good exposure from their association from the club, they are posting record profits so why can’t they throw some extra money City’s way in sponsorships.

The PL will try to do their comparison to other clubs but we have a huge raft of reasons why we are worth more to a sponsor than others. Just for starters, year after year in final stages of champs league.

 

[ricky77]

Downloaded that for my trip to the NEC tomorrow. Although I'm not sure whether I'll be able to keep going in a straight line when Harris comes out with his usual bollocks.

Well according to Nick , you’re his source

 

[hello]

Downloaded that for my trip to the NEC tomorrow. Although I'm not sure whether I'll be able to keep going in a straight line when Harris comes out with his usual bollocks.

As an ADI, the predictability & repetitive unsubstantiated nature of his replies shouldn't constitute sufficient distraction to jeopardise road safety.