PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[JTBlue1999]

Valid take. By that logic though, if we don't, the position in that case is also largely weakened.

Not in my estimation. In the 115 charges case, the Prem still have to prove a massive conspiracy of unheard of proportions and would be accusing everyone from our executives to the independent auditing companies of being in on it. The evidence would have to be overwhelming to prove such a claim.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Valid take. By that logic though, if we don't, the position in that case is also largely weakened.

I don’t think so. A win strengthens our case but a defeat means we are in the same situation we were if we didn’t bring this action.

Stage one: Did the PL break the law?

If they didn’t then it’s as you were

Stage two: Prove your accusations

 

[jaiguruKun]

I don’t think so. A win strengthens our case but a defeat means we are in the same situation we were if we didn’t bring this action.

Stage one: Did the PL break the law?

If they didn’t then it’s as you were

Stage two: Prove your accusations

These associated party rules which we are challenging were nor even in place when the "115" breaches are alleged to have taken place. If we win this High Court cases it's a nice bit of muscle-flexing but it will have no bearing on the actual substance of the charges.

 

[KS55]

I would imagine that will be 1 of many items included. Khaldoon says we know everything;)

Hope he’s not bluffing.

 

[cheekybids]

Hope he’s not bluffing.

He’s no bluffer & after watching his EOY review I thought he name checked the ladies from the FA & Premier league to display a strong respectful relationship was deliberate.

 

[KS55]

He’s no bluffer & after watching his EOY review I thought he name checked the ladies from the FA & Premier league to display a strong respectful relationship was deliberate.

I agree bluffing is likely against his nature but he is a very successful international businessman, so he will use the dark arts occasionally.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Six weeks seems a very short amount of time to hear our case.

The shorter the time planned the better for the club.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I disagree for my part. I followed it with interest at the time and was surprised when it went quiet. I’ve been expecting it since or at least confirmation that City hadn’t decided to follow up on it.

City abstained from the vote on the basis that they couldn’t vote on something they strongly believed was illegal and that their lawyers had advised them not to sign. City advised the PL not to continue. The PL did continue and voted it through with the caveat that the Directors of the clubs could not be privately sued if there was any comeback.

City warned that they were prepared to challenge on that basis. I didn’t think, on balance, that they were bluffing.

My second surprise was only that the date of the hearing had been leaked.

I do however agree that some posters get overly excited or despondent with each bit of new news but you can’t stop that. People in general just want all this to be over and come to BM as a way of avoiding all the biased reporting elsewhere. BM might be an echo chamber but it’s an escape for most.

Personally I don’t care what rivals think (genuinely) I don’t even care if we have broken rules that I believe were unfair in the first place.

City did the right thing to get us where we are. The rules were constructed by our rivals instead of a truly independent body acting in the interests of the game as a whole. City were the only club that voted for Independent governance…not the actions of a club planning to ruin the game but one that wants to be treated equally.

You can't have followed it too closely. City voted against in February. They abstained in 2021 :)

 

[ArniArason]

Here's something I've wondered for a while when noting the controversy around our Etihad deal.

Regarding the rags Chevrolet sponsorship, considering the enormity of the deal ($559m) and the fact that there was an internal investigation at Chevrolet as to why their marketing exec literally fiddled the books to hide the deal amount from his bosses (because they thought it was a waste of money - and he was subsequently fired). How come the Premier League to this day has never considered looking into this deal? Especially as it was considered by many external experts as being WAY WAY over market value (considering 'soccer' wasn't huge in the US and Chevrolet weren't, and still aren’t big in the UK).

Also, while Etihad ended up sponsoring the best club on the planet for their money. Chevrolet sponsored the rags through seasons of dross for their $559m.

Whistleblower on giant Man United deal 'cost marketer his job at GM'

www.thedrum.com

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

and will take six weeks which means, if correct, that @tolmie's hairdoo was right about the decision being this year.

Let’s hope the rest of his info was also bang on.

It is.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Six weeks is more than enough. Written submissions will have been issued in advance.

Merry Christmas.

 

[JGL07]

Here's something I've wondered for a while when noting the controversy around our Etihad deal.

Considering the enormity of the deal ($599m) and the fact that there was an internal investigation at Chevrolet as to why their marketing exec literally fiddled the books to hide the deal amount from his bosses because they thought it was a waste of money (and he was subsequently fired). How come the Premier League to this day has never considered looking into this deal? Especially as it was considered by many external experts as being WAY WAY over valued (considering 'soccer' wasn't huge in the US and Chevrolet weren't, and aren’t still, big in the UK).

I don't think that Chevrolet even sold cars in the UK at that time. Any GM cars sold would be badged as other marques from the group.

 

[granata1949]

As a city fan in Kyiv (Salford born) it's all nonsense. Little Citeh challenged the red order. And that's it. They changed the rules to stop us. Enjoy the ride. Who cares how many fans we have worldwide. We kept the faith through dark times. Everyone's second team once upon a time. We love city. Are city and will always be city. The rags sold their soul when the premier league started. We kept ours. Still have ours. And fundamentally they dislike this. Because we stuck two fingers up to the rag/Liverpool love in and stuck to what we are. City fans. Trust our owners. And if all goes tits up, I will still say I am from Manchester and support city. No apologies needed. Be proud. Be loud. And I wish I was still there.

 

[domalino]

Six weeks seems a very short amount of time to hear our case.

They managed to try Harold Shipman in 2 months I suspect 6 weeks is plenty for this.

CAS was 3 days.


The big wait is for the judgment anyway.

 

[Keeganagainstunited]

Go City....the entire toon army are right behind you. Its us v the Cartel they made illegal rules to cut our legs off. Delighted you stood up to them

 

[KS55]

They managed to try Harold Shipman in 2 months I suspect 6 weeks is plenty for this.

CAS was 3 days.


The big wait is for the judgment anyway.

If I understood the reports right, when we made our submission to CAS, it was obvious within the first hour that UEFA were losing badly.
No reason that there won’t be a repeat.

 

[eastmanc]

If I understood the reports right, when we made our submission to CAS, it was obvious within the first hour that UEFA were losing badly.
No reason that there won’t be a repeat.

Let's hope so.

 

[supercity88]

They managed to try Harold Shipman in 2 months I suspect 6 weeks is plenty for this.

CAS was 3 days.


The big wait is for the judgment anyway.

CAS then took a month to issue their decision. I can't see why it would be anywhere near 6 weeks in this case. Whilst there are a lot more charges, that's due to the number of seasons they apply to. It's worth noting that the 115 charges may well be reduced by the time we get to a hearing. The parties will be sharing information, agreeing statements of common ground and dropping allegations that are dealt with during the written submission stage. I would anticipate a couple of weeks for the hearing and then a month for a verdict.

The charges are rule breaches across a number of seasons and our evidence is largely through our accounts. To get to the bottom of the majority will be as simple as reading through the evidence provided. At the hearing you would expect the sponsorship matter to be dealt with, as it was with CAS and our suits to turn up and bat that one out of the park. I don't know what else really needs to be extensively discussed at a hearing otherwise.

And the verdict would equally be quite simple because you'd go via rule breach and uphold/dismiss in mass rather than by individual season in the majority of instances.

Undoubtedly if it does take 2-3 weeks instead of the 6 that's been earmarked, we'll get a mix of "that means it went well" or "that means it went badly" before @tolmie's hairdoo drops a bomb on twitter about Khaldoon walking out cock in hand throwing £20s at the hoards of journalists outside.

 

[Combat Carl]

Here's something I've wondered for a while when noting the controversy around our Etihad deal.

Regarding the rags Chevrolet sponsorship, considering the enormity of the deal ($559m) and the fact that there was an internal investigation at Chevrolet as to why their marketing exec literally fiddled the books to hide the deal amount from his bosses (because they thought it was a waste of money - and he was subsequently fired). How come the Premier League to this day has never considered looking into this deal? Especially as it was considered by many external experts as being WAY WAY over market value (considering 'soccer' wasn't huge in the US and Chevrolet weren't, and still aren’t big in the UK).

Also, while Etihad ended up sponsoring the best club on the planet for their money. Chevrolet sponsored the rags through seasons of dross for their $559m.

Whistleblower on giant Man United deal 'cost marketer his job at GM'

www.thedrum.com

Look at the state of that. £17m a year less and 9 years after the Chevrolet deal. This is rag propaganda.Something definitely stinks.
https://m.allfootballapp.com/news/All/Manchester-United-have-pulled-a-rabbit-out-of-the-hat-with-their-£235-million-shirt-sponsor-deal/2578309

 

[domalino]

CAS then took a month to issue their decision. I can't see why it would be anywhere near 6 weeks in this case. Whilst there are a lot more charges, that's due to the number of seasons they apply to. It's worth noting that the 115 charges may well be reduced by the time we get to a hearing. The parties will be sharing information, agreeing statements of common ground and dropping allegations that are dealt with during the written submission stage. I would anticipate a couple of weeks for the hearing and then a month for a verdict.

The charges are rule breaches across a number of seasons and our evidence is largely through our accounts. To get to the bottom of the majority will be as simple as reading through the evidence provided. At the hearing you would expect the sponsorship matter to be dealt with, as it was with CAS and our suits to turn up and bat that one out of the park. I don't know what else really needs to be extensively discussed at a hearing otherwise.

And the verdict would equally be quite simple because you'd go via rule breach and uphold/dismiss in mass rather than by individual season in the majority of instances.

Undoubtedly if it does take 2-3 weeks instead of the 6 that's been earmarked, we'll get a mix of "that means it went well" or "that means it went badly" before @tolmie's hairdoo drops a bomb on twitter about Khaldoon walking out cock in hand throwing £20s at the hoards of journalists outside.

I assume they just try to block out a big enough time frame to definitely do the job.

So if a case could possibly last 6 weeks, you have to book up all 6 weeks because you might not get the same 20 people (lawyers, witnesses, arbiters) in the room again for years.