PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

bobbyowenquiff said:
That is a great post. Your description of the way these sort of cases play out is spot-on. The biggest moment in these legal battles is the advanced disclosure of documents. That's when everyone's cards are on the table. It seems clear that Masters is an imbecile but his lawyers are smart people who will not want to be publically humiliated.
Click to expand...
Exactly how I see it. Now try telling that to the Red Top Mafia & Spuds...
 
Dribble said:
Never give a sucker an even break. They hit us hard, so we should smack em back even harder.
Click to expand...
That's how I feel after the way we have been treated but I suspect City will be under political pressure to be more measured in their response. Khaldoon wears a lot of different hats in the world of business and has to keep a lot of people happy. City always take a long-term view.
 
117 M34 said:
Any idea what they proposed we plead guilty to and what the punishment offered was?

My thinking based on absolutely nothing is that the club wouldn't have a settlement agreement for anything financial but maybe would for the non cooperation as long as the punishment wasn't points based.

Premier league statement being very clear that city provided irrefutable evidence against the financial charges but that we accept some responsibility in not cooperating and have accepted a £20m fine and 5 point deduction suspended for a year.
Everyone saves face and we don't have to have a drawn out trial.
Click to expand...
That will be enough to slander the club for years and years. Look how much mileage they got out of ‘time barred’.

Nah, if we have not broken any rule, and if more importantly they can’t prove that then I want a statement that says exactly that.
 
MMA said:
100% this.
Yank owners all pissing in the same pot.
Masters is the epstein of the Premier league.
He'll take all the heat but we all know who's pulling the strings.
Red top yank owners.
Click to expand...
That’s why he got the job. He probably agreed to it in his private interview.
 
wolviedinho said:
That will be enough to slander the club for years and years. Look how much mileage they got out of ‘time barred’.

Nah, if we have not broken any rule, and if more importantly they can’t prove that then I want a statement that says exactly that.
Click to expand...
f@$k slander. it's defamation I'm worried about.
 
I'msingingingtheblues said:
Interesting article in 14th April Sunday Times Business Section - featuring Alberto Galassi (CEO of Ferretti) who's a non-exec director of City football Group - when questioned about the charges he says "I am not entitled to discuss this, but perhaps you can tell from my body language I am super confident (about the outcome)"
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting that snippet.

Here is the extract:

At Piaggio, where he climbed from the sales and marketing departments to became chief executive in 2009, Galassi became close friends with the future Manchester City chairman, Khaldoon Al Mubarak, who led Abu Dhabi’s investment in the aerospace company in 2006.

Al Mubarak appointed Galassi to the board of Man City as a non-executive director in 2012. Despite the team’s success on the pitch, the club has been charged with 115 breaches of financial fair play regulations. “I am not entitled to discuss this, but perhaps you can tell from my body language I am super confident [about the outcome],” he says.

Crack out the champagne blues. Once we are cleared I genuinely believe we will break the internet and any red **** still breathing will be looking for a hole to crawl into.
 
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue said:
It's possible that the IC have been reviewing the evidence presented to them and have gone back to the PL saying "Are you serious?"
Click to expand...
Is it also possible that the PL have seen the colour of our money re the irrefutable evidence we feel we have and decided they no longer want to offer any further evidence as happens in criminal trials?
 
The more you think about it, the more it feels like this, is coming down to the none co-operation issue. Because that's probably the only thing they can contest, if everything else is falling in, around them.
 
Rammy Blue said:
Not if they drop them all due to irrefutable evidence.
Click to expand...
Surely that would have happened months ago, if we actually had the irrefutable evidence we claim.

If this turns out to be true I will be embarrassed as anyone and I will personally apologise to Prestige. But I'm not going to start writing my apology letter yet.
 
MarsLlama said:
Surely that would have happened months ago, if we actually had the irrefutable evidence we claim.

If this turns out to be true I will be embarrassed as anyone and I will personally apologise to Prestige. But I'm not going to start writing my apology letter yet.
Click to expand...

The irrefutable evidence is our accounts and they have to go through about 10 years of them
 
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