PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

jrb said:
Just wait until City are found guilty of the 115 charges. ;-) Harris, Top Hat, Migs, etc, will be all over this thread.
Click to expand...
Alternatively, when we are cleared we will witness mass hari kiri or protestations that “City got away with it again” or both.
 
Son of Merv said:
Just a small point...you're quoting the Ordinary Arbitration regs and the hearing was an appeal, so section C R54 is the regulation that covers appointment of the panel.
Click to expand...
I know its been said a million times but it struck me this morning reading your comment (as good as it is) that its so far away from conversations ive had since junior blue days ('74) up until '08. You would have no clue that we were talking about sport let alone a football club. It's sad its come to this, it's like reading contracts and docs at work but it's now consuming our free time as well I miss the Asa Hartford days!!
 
Last edited:
give it to gordon said:
Seems odd to me how a case of alleged fraud won't involve our accountants. I think I know who I believe ;)
Click to expand...
He didn't even understand the points being made - his whole analysis (that I saw before finally blocking him for trolling) was flawed and demonstrated very little insight on these matters (his pure legal stuff was higher quality) I am not suggesting BDO come along as a witness. But a finding that all of the accounts for a decade were materially wrong has very serious implications for BDO. To be frank, to anyone that knows anything about the subject, it isn't even debatable. The PLs allegation is quite precisely that the accounts filed by City are wrong and not true. So if the PL are right either BDO have been actively misled (because the audit questions/reps have been asked/given repeatedly including in the face of UEFA investigation 1, UEFA investigation 2, CAS, PL investigation, charge) or BDO are negligent (pretty unlikely in the face of so many external red flags).

These people all think shouting Wirecard or Enron is a good answer. In fact, it simply serves to highlight how high the bar is for the PL. If the PL can prove a new Wirecard or Enron in an IC, that will be some scoop and, as I have always said, super serious.
 
projectriver said:
He didn't even understand the points being made - his whole analysis (that I saw before finally blocking him for trolling) was flawed and demonstrated very little insight on these matters (his pure legal stuff was higher quality) I am not suggesting BDO come along as a witness. But a finding that all of the accounts for a decade were materially wrong has very serious implications for BDO. To be frank, to anyone that knows anything about the subject, it isn't even debatable. The PLs allegation is quite precisely that the accounts filed by City are wrong and not true. So if the PL are right either BDO have been actively misled (because the audit questions/reps have been asked/given repeatedly including in the face of UEFA investigation 1, UEFA investigation 2, CAS, PL investigation, charge) or BDO are negligent (pretty unlikely in the face of so many external red flags).

These people all think shouting Wirecard or Enron is a good answer. In fact, it simply serves to highlight how high the bar is for the PL. If the PL can prove a new Wirecard or Enron in an IC, that will be some scoop and, as I have always said, super serious.
Click to expand...

You still think Hat's an American student?
Everything about it screams Harris to me.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Pretty sure it means that anything before February 2017 is time limited, the only discussion being if anything that happened before then was "deliberately concealed" in which case it can still be considered because discovery was November 2018 (ie less than six years before February 2023).

I doubt they can prove Mancini was deliberately concealed because there was no point: no FFP and no "full remuneration" disclosure requirement. I also doubt Fordham can be proven to be deliberately concealed. It was all disclosed in the accounts so they could have looked at it at any time. So that really just leaves the sponsorships and Toure (if that is, indeed, part of the allegations). I know nothing about Toure, tbh.
Click to expand...
I also don't know, or have heard, anything about the allegations about Yaya. Can anyone enlighten me?
 
Last edited:
projectriver said:
He didn't even understand the points being made - his whole analysis (that I saw before finally blocking him for trolling) was flawed and demonstrated very little insight on these matters (his pure legal stuff was higher quality) I am not suggesting BDO come along as a witness. But a finding that all of the accounts for a decade were materially wrong has very serious implications for BDO. To be frank, to anyone that knows anything about the subject, it isn't even debatable. The PLs allegation is quite precisely that the accounts filed by City are wrong and not true. So if the PL are right either BDO have been actively misled (because the audit questions/reps have been asked/given repeatedly including in the face of UEFA investigation 1, UEFA investigation 2, CAS, PL investigation, charge) or BDO are negligent (pretty unlikely in the face of so many external red flags).

These people all think shouting Wirecard or Enron is a good answer. In fact, it simply serves to highlight how high the bar is for the PL. If the PL can prove a new Wirecard or Enron in an IC, that will be some scoop and, as I have always said, super serious.
Click to expand...

I noticed your conversations with him/them have engaged replies from a good few auditors. Some sound more credible in terms of experience and input than others.

Then again, this stuff is awfully difficult to follow for a KFA like me so it makes it all the harder to know who may sound plausible but is actually talking shite and the other way around. Specious was the word @petrusha used and it fits perfectly.

Social media had everyone clued up on virology from 2020-2022, now we're all suddenly top accountants, auditors, solicitors...isn't it funny? =)
 
ayrshire_blue said:
I noticed your conversations with him/them have engaged replies from a good few auditors. Some sound more credible in terms of experience and input than others.

Then again, this stuff is awfully difficult to follow for a KFA like me so it makes it all the harder to know who may sound plausible but is actually talking shite and the other way around. Specious was the word @petrusha used and it fits perfectly.

Social media had everyone clued up on virology from 2020-2022, now we're all suddenly top accountants, auditors, solicitors...isn't it funny? =)
Click to expand...
Knowledge required to be a City fan:
1. Statute of Limitations.
2. IAS 24
3. The law of Contract. Extensive as it is common law. Do you know that Consideration must move from the Promisee or that parties should be Usque ad Unum?
4. Various Misrepresentation Acts and Contracts (Unfair Terms) Act.
5. Libel laws.
6. Arbitration Act.
It should be noted that knowledge and sensible views on football are not required but a working knowledge of Bill Leivers and Dave Ewing is useful.
A complete list of Managers post Joe Mercer needs to be mastered. Who’s repeated tagline was “Yes, boss”?
 
Last edited:
projectriver said:
He didn't even understand the points being made - his whole analysis (that I saw before finally blocking him for trolling) was flawed and demonstrated very little insight on these matters (his pure legal stuff was higher quality) I am not suggesting BDO come along as a witness. But a finding that all of the accounts for a decade were materially wrong has very serious implications for BDO. To be frank, to anyone that knows anything about the subject, it isn't even debatable. The PLs allegation is quite precisely that the accounts filed by City are wrong and not true. So if the PL are right either BDO have been actively misled (because the audit questions/reps have been asked/given repeatedly including in the face of UEFA investigation 1, UEFA investigation 2, CAS, PL investigation, charge) or BDO are negligent (pretty unlikely in the face of so many external red flags).

These people all think shouting Wirecard or Enron is a good answer. In fact, it simply serves to highlight how high the bar is for the PL. If the PL can prove a new Wirecard or Enron in an IC, that will be some scoop and, as I have always said, super serious.
Click to expand...

Tbf to him, he had a point that it was unlikely the auditors would have picked anything up on the alleged actions pre-email leak. Where he is wrong is that all BDO could do is ask management about the emails when the emails were leaked and then accept it. Quite spectacularly wrong.
 
projectriver said:
He didn't even understand the points being made - his whole analysis (that I saw before finally blocking him for trolling) was flawed and demonstrated very little insight on these matters (his pure legal stuff was higher quality) I am not suggesting BDO come along as a witness. But a finding that all of the accounts for a decade were materially wrong has very serious implications for BDO. To be frank, to anyone that knows anything about the subject, it isn't even debatable. The PLs allegation is quite precisely that the accounts filed by City are wrong and not true. So if the PL are right either BDO have been actively misled (because the audit questions/reps have been asked/given repeatedly including in the face of UEFA investigation 1, UEFA investigation 2, CAS, PL investigation, charge) or BDO are negligent (pretty unlikely in the face of so many external red flags).

These people all think shouting Wirecard or Enron is a good answer. In fact, it simply serves to highlight how high the bar is for the PL. If the PL can prove a new Wirecard or Enron in an IC, that will be some scoop and, as I have always said, super serious.
Click to expand...

I've asked this a couple of times already.

At what point does all this public speculation and side analysis become unhelpful or counterproductive? To the actual process itself.

I think we have crossed that line myself, but still it snowballs on.
 
KS55 said:
Knowledge required to be a City fan:
1. Statute of Limitations.
2. IAS 24
3. The law of Contract. Extensive as it is common law. Do you know that Consideration must move from the Promisee or that parties should be Usque ad Unum?
4. Various Misrepresentation Acts and Contracts (Unfair Terms) Act.
5. Libel laws.
6. Arbitration Act.
It should be noted that knowledge and sensible views on football are not required but a working knowledge of Bill Leivers and Dave Ewing is useful.
A complete list of Managers post Joe Mercer needs to be mastered. Who’s repeated tagline was “Yes, boss”?
Click to expand...
For background, a brief knowledge of middle eastern politics and appreciation of the intricacies of differing branches of Muslim sects.

It's certainly put the debate re barm/bap etc to one side.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Tbf to him, he had a point that it was unlikely the auditors would have picked anything up on the alleged actions pre-email leak. Where he is wrong is that all BDO could do is ask management about the emails when the emails were leaked and then accept it. Quite spectacularly wrong.
Click to expand...
I didn't read that. But it is also not true. The club has been under investigation in respect of the Etihad and Etisalat contracts since 2012. The idea that questions have not been raised consistently since then is totally implausible. And then with more detail and precision after the leaks.
 
Coatigan said:
I've asked this a couple of times already.

At what point does all this public speculation and side analysis become unhelpful or counterproductive? To the actual process itself.

I think we have crossed that line myself, but still it snowballs on.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the actual process. But relevant to public opinion. Like it or not that MH post did go viral despite its flaws and errors.
 
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