PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

CC1 said:
Disgusting & planned in order to keep the dirt swirling

Good luck with your complaint.
Click to expand...
The BBC article claims it only has what Der Spiegl published to go on. But the Der Spiegl story was based on five/six emails and did not accuse City of providing false accounts on multiple occasions. This is just a hatchet job designed to undermine City's legal case.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
None of this would have happened if the PL had a strong leader. Masters has been out of his depth since day one. There is nothing in his past career that suggests he would be able to cope with legal and financial pressures at such a high level. He has been manipulated into a position and is too far gone to get out. After watching him give evidence to two Commons Select Committees I have a much better understanding of what has happened. He was a rabbit in the headlights. Some of the Committee members ended up mocking him. The US influenced clubs have pushed him into a position and he has not been strong enough to resist. It has been a disastrous managerial failure, a bit like the Post Office scandal which could never have happened with strong leadership.
Click to expand...

Only this.

The lack of leadership at the PL is a scandal.
 
ayrshire_blue said:
I do like that quote. But glass half empty post he's hardly going to turn round and say "Honestly I don't know which way it'll go, it's out of our hands, I believe we're innocent but it'll be up to the IC to make that decision".

The PL I'm sure are equally as confident in their position.

Of course I believe Khaldoon, but it's based on pure faith and not knowledge. The club aren't saying anything I wouldn't expect them to say given the severity of the charges. Whether it's posturing or whether it's genuine knowledge that this is going absolutely nowhere, nobody knows.
Click to expand...
True, but in that case he could’ve just said confident instead of “super confident”.
 
MCC said:
BBC have obviously had a letter and are fighting back with that one-sided drivel. Absolutely pathetic but so predictable.
Click to expand...

Do you really think so , if they have and I very much doubt it in fact am near enough positive , they have clearly put it in the bin and cracked on
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
The BBC article claims it only has what Der Spiegl published to go on. But the Der Spiegl story was based on five/six emails and did not accuse City of providing false accounts on multiple occasions. This is just a hatchet job designed to undermine City's legal case.
Click to expand...

Tbh, without making an assessment on the whys and wherefores now, the questions are in the public domain, if clumsily expressed. I think it is just a poorly written article from someone in the sport's department who doesn't know what he is talking about. Why should he? The fault isn't with the guy writing it, it is with the editor who allows it to be published without a review by someone with a legal background and some knowledge of the case to ensure it meets some sort of standard. Especially on such a complicated and high profile issue.
 
Bez said:
I've written a complaint about the BBC article and asked them to update it due to factual inaccuracies. I've also told them to read the CAS report in order to get their facts straight.

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City 115 charges hearing Q&A: What is latest on PSR & FFP case?

Manchester City's hearing into 115 Premier League charges should be heard this season - BBC Sport looks at the latest on the case.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Any chance you could paste the complaint in here as I would also like to complain.
 
Plain Speaking said:
I certainly never made any claims about Pawson, prior to Wolves, his stats for us are pretty bang on what you would expect.

Also I am not using 'skewed stats', these are clean stats of the referee win % with clubs. You can compare directly with the club's actual win %.

There should not be such huge discrepancies between referee's win % for different club's. Kavanagh's said to support Liverpool, his win % with them is 72.2%, the highest of all PL clubs, (although Klopp's win % is only 60.9%), City's win% under Kavanagh is 60%, although Pep's win % is 72.6%.

Taylor's said to support Utd, his family are season ticket holders, his win % for Utd is 56.1%, Incredibly the highest of all PL clubs! City's win % under Taylor is 52.9%. Remarkable considering our respective success over the last decade! Taylor has also given less penalties against Utd than any other of the big PL sides, almost 4 times less than he's given against City.

I agree we have to show up and try and take it out of their hands but the intention of the PL/Pigmol to try and nobble us in the next 2 fixtures is clear to see.
Click to expand...
Some Arsenal fans are also moaning about the appointment of Tierney for their game against United, given that he’s from Wigan and they reckon he might be biased towards United….or us!
 
With Arsenal as arguably the main complainer, it's incompetence beyond belief that the Prem should appoint an Arsenal club member and season ticket holder to chair the kangaroo court. Personally, I expect the kangaroo court to screw us over initially, but our lawyers will have expected this and have a proper legal process ready to kick in until the matter has been through the courts when we'll have the Prem on the stand.

What's laughable is that some pundits criticise the Prem for harsh treatment of Everton and Forest, but when it comes to us the Prem is a beacon of light and justice. For what it's worth, in my opinion the Prem's treatment of Everton and Forest is very harsh - ultra vires I'd say. At the end of the day, the Prem, FA, UEFA and FIFA are just commercial businesses. The Prem is a commercial business owned by the Prem clubs masquerading as a governmental judicial authority. They've been egged on by the cartel clubs who cannot handle the fact that they no longer have first pick of the best coaches and players. In fact, we don't do the galactico model - we sign young players at prices many clubs could afford with the right temperament and help them develop into superstars.

I'm no lawyer (obviously) but one commercial business (the Prem) trying to restrict how another commercial business (us and the other Prem clubs) operates commercially is a joke. It's like hearing Mr Shearer say (and he's said this before) when a player's actions towards another player amounted to criminal assault 'Keep the police out of this, let football deal with it'. In his head, football operates in a bubble whereby the normal rules of law and order don't apply. Football is just another workplace - nothing special - no more or less a workplace than Tescos, Glaxo, the Midland Hotel or your local corner shop.

So, we're the sixth highest Prem net spenders of the last six years and fourth highest Prem net spenders of the last ten/eleven years. Why would anyone 'cheat' to become the sixth highest Prem net spenders?

In the capitalist west, you can start or take over an existing business, expand and develop it - you can even go bust. Why does football think it is a special case - immune from the normal laws of commerce? Imagine a government authority telling a young tech entrepeneur 'Sorry, you can't expand your amazing business because Microsoft and Amazon would lose business to you.' In fact, I'd go as far as saying FFP and PSR are soviet block type constructs designed to keep the incumbents at the top of the tree!!

Where would Madrid be without the Spanish taxpayer bailing them out while the galactico signings continued? How many trophies would they have won if they could only spend their own money? They were technically insolvent. To me, that is a problem.

I'm proud of the club for the way they stood up to UEFA and kicked their arses at CAS, and I'm proud of the way they're handling this. And remember, no bitter fan, pundit or TV presenter has the tiniest most miniscule shred of hard evidence of wrongdoing. You'd think the legal dept at the BBC, Sky and TNT would be having a word with their pundits and presenters etc to the effect that 'City's legal team are watching and recording every single broadcast word you say and may use those words against the corporation and you personally in a court of law. So, here is what you can say and here is what you can't..........' I have no doubt that a sizeable proportion of pundits have no grasp of what they can and can't say and say stuff anyway out of blind stupidity. We know who they are.
 
Last edited:
Bez said:
I've written a complaint about the BBC article and asked them to update it due to factual inaccuracies. I've also told them to read the CAS report in order to get their facts straight.

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City 115 charges hearing Q&A: What is latest on PSR & FFP case?

Manchester City's hearing into 115 Premier League charges should be heard this season - BBC Sport looks at the latest on the case.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
What have they said that’s wrong so I don’t have to read it to find out
 
“When will City be punished”? From the national broadcaster. Nothing like a fair hearing.

This suggests to me that no letters have been issued and it will be left to City fans to try and put these biased clowns right.

Oh for our owners to think of how this witch-hunt effects City fans and to actually do something publicly about it.
 
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