PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

nmc said:
Is that how this case works…. The PLs case seems to be that we have overstated sponsorship? I.e. Etihad paid £8m and our owner topped it up to £60m by injecting £52 of his own cash. Surely the prosecution to make such a ridiculous allegation must have some evidence to back up such an allegation? There is no requirement for City to present any irrefutable evidence until the prosecution has presented a case… personally I think they have the Der Spiegel emails and that’s the lot.
Click to expand...

Well, yes. For the Etihad sponsorship, where on earth would they get the evidence that Mansour paid most of the money to Etihad?

They have some emails that say an "HH" arranged for the monies, some bank statements that follow the numbers in the emails (8 from Etihad and 52 from central funds) but emails don't prove what happened even if they mean what the PL say they may mean. They have no idea at all where Etihad got the money. There will be nothing at the club that shows that, nor should there be, and they don't have the power to demand information from Mansour or Etihad. I think we can discount a whistle-blower. So the only explanation I can provide is that they decided to refer the allegations to close the investigation by "forcing" the club to provide the withheld evidence to the IC. The alternative would have been an embarrassing climbdown for the PL.

The outcome, though, will be an embarrassing "defeat" for the PL which is why the club have been so clever.
 
Centurions said:
To be fair there's two sets of cunts playing today and one of them has to win. Best case scenario is it stops the media banging on about quadruples.
Click to expand...
nope.
best case scenario is the rags get hammered today
and then we hammer the bin-dippers in the final.
fuck the media.
 
Has there been some news about the proceedings in the last few days ? I've had a few days away from the Internet ( recommend to all !)
Amid a couple of posters arguing between themselves ad nauseum there seems to be reference to some news.
Can anyone put this up or give a quick summary ?

Don't include the word doomed.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
They don’t want us mate.
They want the who pay the most money.

This is the way of things now, and football is no different.
In a perfect world, us legacy fans would be treated with care and respect. But this is not a perfect world.
Click to expand...

Yep us fans that's been through the 70's 80's 90's 00's to now will be gone eventually just with age and the newer fans woman kids men will be the happy clappy fans of the future and is better than the some of the older fans from the hooliganism era the tribalism be slowly go to..
 
halfcenturyup said:
Well, yes. For the Etihad sponsorship, where on earth would they get the evidence that Mansour paid most of the money to Etihad?

They have some emails that say an "HH" arranged for the monies, some bank statements that follow the numbers in the emails (8 from Etihad and 52 from central funds) but emails don't prove what happened even if they mean what the PL say they may mean. They have no idea at all where Etihad got the money. There will be nothing at the club that shows that, nor should there be, and they don't have the power to demand information from Mansour or Etihad. I think we can discount a whistle-blower. So the only explanation I can provide is that they decided to refer the allegations to close the investigation by "forcing" the club to provide the withheld evidence to the IC. The alternative would have been an embarrassing climbdown for the PL.

The outcome, though, will be an embarrassing "defeat" for the PL which is why the club have been so clever.
Click to expand...

That’s my point it’s a ridiculous allegation and they have to prove their case BEFORE we have to prove anything. The onus is on them… which the majority of the media completely fail to understand. If the PL sent their evidence to the CPS - do you think they’d run with the case…. Absolutely they wouldn’t but then again UEFA had no evidence but, internally they still found us guilty - which was a farce when you read the CAS judgement. The PL must have been told by their legal team that they have little chance of making anything stick but, one can only assume that the greatest pressure is being applied by Execs at the Red shirt clubs who have limited actual knowledge of the facts. They just want us guilty.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
If you ignore the noise from the parasites looking for engagement and sound bites everything points to us being completely cleared.

United are getting in their early with their comments, and whether directly involved or not, wouldn’t have touched Omar with a barge pole if we weren’t due to be cleared.
I don’t want it but I’m also 99% sure we’ll stadium share as an upper management ‘water under the bridge’ moment.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Liverpool started cozying up to us soon as well
Click to expand...
will they have sufficient time to disinfect seats between games
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
The decision to allow the rags to ground share will ultimately be down to local residents and councillors. There are legal challenges on going between them and the new Arena management. Thats why the Arena have had licence applications refused. They also successfully campaigned for the Eastlands Resident Parking scheme which has affected at lot of blues. There's no chance whatsoever they will accept another 30 odd rag match days for the 3 or 4 years on top of City games, Arena events, Academy games and summer concerts. If the rags want to ground share they should try Bolton or Wigan, the Ethihad is a total non starter.
Click to expand...
Or Salford
 
halfcenturyup said:
Well, yes. For the Etihad sponsorship, where on earth would they get the evidence that Mansour paid most of the money to Etihad?

They have some emails that say an "HH" arranged for the monies, some bank statements that follow the numbers in the emails (8 from Etihad and 52 from central funds) but emails don't prove what happened even if they mean what the PL say they may mean. They have no idea at all where Etihad got the money. There will be nothing at the club that shows that, nor should there be, and they don't have the power to demand information from Mansour or Etihad. I think we can discount a whistle-blower. So the only explanation I can provide is that they decided to refer the allegations to close the investigation by "forcing" the club to provide the withheld evidence to the IC. The alternative would have been an embarrassing climbdown for the PL.

The outcome, though, will be an embarrassing "defeat" for the PL which is why the club have been so clever.
Click to expand...
Is it possible at even this late stage that a statement by the PL would halt procedings.? By that I mean something acceptable to City that say admits their gut feeling about payment details was simply misplaced.
If so now they have all the things City refused to originally gave surely it will be more embarrassing to continue without that evidence that prompted the action.
 
SilverFox2 said:
Is it possible at even this late stage that a statement by the PL would halt procedings.? By that I mean something acceptable to City that say admits their gut feeling about payment details was simply misplaced.
If so now they have all the things City refused to originally gave surely it will be more embarrassing to continue without that evidence that prompted the action.
Click to expand...

It's a bit like the ending to Ghostbusters. To paraphrase: Choose the embarrassment of your destruction :)

But no, I don't think withdrawing the allegations is at all likely. Even if the serious charges aren't proven they will be able to get the club on something soft I guess, with a small sanction.
 
iwasthere1968 said:
Has there been some news about the proceedings in the last few days ? I've had a few days away from the Internet ( recommend to all !)
Amid a couple of posters arguing between themselves ad nauseum there seems to be reference to some news.
Can anyone put this up or give a quick summary ?

Don't include the word doomed.
Click to expand...
Okay then.
IMG_1218.jpeg
 
Kinkys Left Foot said:
I stand to be corrected but are we not past the discovery stage of the investigation where the plaintiffs are obliged to have provided us with all their evidence for their charges?

If so the fact we have not shat our kecks at the mere weight of their smoking gun and held our hands up with an "its a fair cop guvnor" should lead us to believe they have waved the der Spiegel emails at us once again.

Additional info allegedly pointing to a query re a certain single individuals testimony and its veracity is merely a red herring by our detractors. His testimony was not the only verification of the true events as stated by our and others documentation, accounts etc.

We all wait for the eventual reveal of the PL's "evidence" with bated breath. It should be a fucking scandal if all they have is what UEFA had and are simply rehashing the same case as held at CAS and expecting or hoping for a different outcome.
Click to expand...
Heads should roll if that proves to be the case.
 
halfcenturyup said:
It's a bit like the ending to Ghostbusters. To paraphrase: Choose the embarrassment of your destruction :)

But no, I don't think withdrawing the allegations is at all likely. Even if the serious charges aren't proven they will be able to get the club on something soft I guess, with a small sanction.
Click to expand...
So if they carry on and secure a small victory you think that is enough to justify the massive extra time in court
bill the PL members must subscribe to,?

Like being found not guilty of murder but maximum penalty for out of date tax disc on the car.
Wolves etc will be pleased.
 
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