PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

jamielowndes said:
Other clubs are going to have a vested interest in our downfall because it benefits them.

But to say that means the PL is actively collaborating with those 9 clubs to ensure our downfall is tin foil hat territory.
Click to expand...
www.dailymail.co.uk

Rivals Big Six clubs 'pushing hardest for Man City to be punished'

Should Man City be found guilty, they face a range of potential sanctions including a points deduction or even an expulsion - though it could take years to come to a conclusion.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 
BAB.DAB said:
www.dailymail.co.uk

Rivals Big Six clubs 'pushing hardest for Man City to be punished'

Should Man City be found guilty, they face a range of potential sanctions including a points deduction or even an expulsion - though it could take years to come to a conclusion.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
That literally validates what I said.

Other teams are going to push for us to be sanctioned because its now an open spot if we get kicked out.

Nowhere in that article does it say the Premier League is actively taking on advice from these clubs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
Question for the lawyers out there. Everyone keeps talking about legal and illegal. What is the legal status of the Premier League? Are we talking about breaching the rules of a club? Are we talking about breaching the articles of association of a limited company? I understand that both could also be in contravention of the law of the land.
 
Last edited:
jimmygrimblesboots said:
The lack of specifics in the charges only confuse the situation , what are they actually accusing us off , cooking the books , false accounting if this is the case then how the f*ck are they going to prove it when companies house and HMRC havent instigated any charges.
It appears Masters was desperate to appease the red'istree clubs and the Premier league threw everything they could at us , 115 charges is just sensationalism there is actually half a dozen repeated several times ,but the charges have done what Master's paymasters wanted , if we 100% prove all the charges incorrect our reputation has been damaged and the smear campaign would have been successful.
Click to expand...
Half a dozen ? I didn’t realise there were that many. The sponsorship income, Mancini’s salary? CFG transfers, non cooperation. What are the others?
 
At-Swim-Two-Birds said:
Question for the lawyers out there. Everyone keeps talking about legal and illegal. What is the legal status of the Premier League? Are we talking about breaching the rules of a club? Are we talking about breaching the articles of association of a limited company? I understand that both could also be in contravention of the law of the land.
Click to expand...

breaching the rules of a club.
 
If the other 19 clubs get their way then we will suffer the same fate as we did in 1906 when we were almost closed down. We didn't have a long history then obviously, but we were becoming too powerful for the rest and we were made to suffer for becoming too powerful even though the rest of the league were thought to be equally guilty.

Who said we had no history?
 
Centurions said:
5,500,000 documents and emails in total.

The initial 'reveal' by der spielgel used (I think) 5 with 2 of them spliced together to generate more faux outrage. There was another (maybe) half a dozen revealed later regarding Mancini and Fordham(?)

We're still waiting for the other 5,499,990 emails and documents to be drip fed over the next 999 years.
Click to expand...

Cheers, I thought it was something along these lines.

Just shows how practically squeaky clean we actually are, that so many were taken yet so little was found. The square root of fuck all and that should be the story - millions of emails and documents and nothing incriminating found.

Let them do that to the red cartel and see what they find.
 
Maly said:
Lol

I mean for seasons 2018 onwards

View attachment 118551
Click to expand...

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough.

The investigation started in 2018, so the allegation is that the club didn't co-operate in any of the years from 2018 to when the investigation was closed and the allegations were referred to the disciplinary panel in 2023, ie seasons 2018/19, 2019/20, 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23.

There is no allegation of non-cooperation prior to season 2018/19 because there was no investigation before then, so no requirement to co-operate with anything.
 
cibaman said:
Half a dozen ? I didn’t realise there were that many. The sponsorship income, Mancini’s salary? CFG transfers, non cooperation. What are the others?
Click to expand...

Filing incorrect accounting information, breaching PL FFP, not complying with UEFA financial and licensing rules.
 
waspish said:
The last one there the rags seems to be fine with that one after breaking European ffp rules
Click to expand...

I think it's not just a break-even thing, it will be the equivalent of filing incorrect accounts with the PL. So, filing incorrect accounts with UEFA.

We don't know for sure, of course. Actually, we don't know anything for sure other than the list of rules that have allegedly been breached. We can make educated guesses, though.
 
petrusha said:
Going back over two days and more than 20 pages in the thread, but I liked this post when I saw it and think it raises an important but oft-overlooked point. I fully agree with your final sentence, but what most people generally haven't realised is that it would be manifestly straightforward for City to operate successfully, from the club's point of view, within the rules we're accused of breaking.

It's commonly asserted that we have access to the best and most expensive professional advice (not invariably the same thing, but the aphorism that one gets what one pays for is as true here as in any other context). Why is it so hard for people to believe that, having recourse to the services of leading professionals, we were able to find ways to circumvent the rules in question?

Now, you'll get the usual simpletons bleating risibly about the "spirit of the regulations" or other similar nonsense, in the way I believe Shaun Custis has been on Talksport this morning with reference to our recent signing of the American teenager Cavan Sullivan. However, as @Chris in London posted some time back, the "spirit of the [regulations we're accused of having breached] was to give the established G14 teams a competitive advantage at our expense [so] I frankly don't give a fuck".

This all illustrates how invidious the coverage of the entire issue has been. The Football Leaks/Der Spiegel revelations have been almost universally presented as a metaphorical smoking gun when, as many of us said at the time, they represented no such thing. They could be read in that light, but were equally consistent with a business trying to find ways to operate lawfully within the relevant rules notwithstanding that such rules had been deliberately crafted to stymie us.

A coterie of bad-faith liars have sought to drive coverage in that direction. Others, with no understanding of the business side of football, tag along, fearful of the derision that would ensue were they to gainsay the prevailing groupthink. And the result now is that we're habitually confronted by a disheartening parade of imbeciles who witlessly parrot the line about 115 charges, thinking that they're outlining a telling line of reasoning. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

The line of thinking that always amazes me is the idea that Mansour was so influential in Abu Dhabi that he could tell a highly-regulated company in a highly-regulated industry that he would give them some money on the side to top-up the City sponsorship, but he wasn't influential enough, or wasn't smart enough, to have got the state to fund Etihad with a tiny bit more money so they could pay the sponsorship directly.

I just don't see the joined-up thinking in these allegations.

They aren't dealing with some idiot Del Boy character here .....


Edit: That would be Chelsea we are talking about there. Sorry, couldn't resist :)
 
Last edited:
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Chelsea are getting increasingly creative / desperate to get out of their PSR bind. This exclusive has gone viral for Stefan

Click to expand...


Well if it's all legal they found the loop hole that will let them spend again this summer! Maybe if we tried this 10 year ago the loop hole would have been tied off! Because we know the media would be all over it till it was changed..
 
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