6 June 2024 - "They did raise some intriguing points in the 165 page document, which I had to read overnight, so thank you very much to person X who sent it to me from our good friends in the media."
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
6 June 2024 - "They did raise some intriguing points in the 165 page document, which I had to read overnight, so thank you very much to person X who sent it to me from our good friends in the media."
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,933
6 June 2024 - "They did raise some intriguing points in the 165 page document, which I had to read overnight, so thank you very much to person X who sent it to me from our good friends in the media."
An easy mistake to make when you meant to say "I haven't seen the document" :)
I suspect the arbitrators are putting heat on the PL to find out where the leak came from and the last thing Lawton, the person who leaked it and the PL needed is someone indicating it has been passed around.
Not a good look for Maguire, tbh. At least shows poor judgment.
Plain Speaking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 5,198
Clearly trying to hush up previous leaks!6 June 2024 - "They did raise some intriguing points in the 165 page document, which I had to read overnight, so thank you very much to person X who sent it to me from our good friends in the media."
Grassland Blue
Well-Known Member
Surely clubs with big debts should be required to pay off some of the capital each year?I'm struck, not for the first time recently, by how far away wider discourse about FFP has got from "here to protect clubs from dodgy owners spending what they don't have" to "here to stop rich owners running away with the league". Regulation for the latter is going to be vastly different to the former, and we have ended up with a right regulatory mess.
Suppose the lenders call in the money owing?
PSR - circumvented.
feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
Surely clubs with big debts should be required to pay off some of the capital each year?
Suppose the lenders call in the money owing?
PSR - circumvented.
Financial fair play clearly isn’t working when 19 of the 20 Premier League clubs posted losses last year.
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 12,902
An easy mistake to make when you meant to say "I haven't seen the document" :)
I suspect the arbitrators are putting heat on the PL to find out where the leak came from and the last thing Lawton, the person who leaked it and the PL needed is someone indicating it has been passed around.
Not a good look for Maguire, tbh. At least shows poor judgment.
We’ll have his emails as well ;)
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 12,902
Clearly trying to hush up previous leaks!
Having as much luck as the Rags with theirs….
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
Cleared of all the main charges sounds good. This would mean we have proved that the main charges were without foundation. It would seem incongruous to then uphold the non cooperation charges. Surely the onus is on the PL to bring evidence to support the charges they brought in the first place.FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
Stoned Rose
Well-Known Member
He’s a home and away Blue, but the insinuation he’s a Rag is still quite amusing :D
Strewth.
Stoned Rose
Well-Known Member
FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
Sounds like shite tbf mate.
as khaldoon said we are not taking a pinch anymore, why on earth would we offer the pl a way out of this mess, its like someone trying to bankrupt you and giving them a few grand so they feel better about it, fuck the plFWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
No way should or would we accept a points deduction for non cooperation with rivals wanting to copy our business model.FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.The board PL appointed or not would have to come up with irrefutable documented reasoning as to why they havent found in citys favour, it cant just be becuase the pl said so and the red top fans want it to be so
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.
cityboy2602
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 298
Maguire stated clearly he had been sent the document. That was a stupid thing to say for an expert. I am sure he has seen the document but is now in delete mode.
Not sure I buy this. Surely it'll be hard for PL to prove non cooperation when our submitted accounts were independently audited every year.FWIW, I've heard recently - albeit indirectly - that we should be cleared of all the main charges but could get found guilty of the non cooperation charges which would be a fine but possibly also a small points deduction. I'll add that the points deduction doesn't make any sense to me because if we only get done for non cooperation then we've not gained a sporting advantage. I'm also not buying that we've not cooperated either - sure, we'll have dug our heels in on certain things but that doesn't necessarily equate to non cooperation - but perhaps this is City offering the PL a way out of the mess that is clearly of their own making and giving them a small win to quieten the red shirt cartel clubs.
as well they might but that isnt the point, whatever the verdict is there has to be damn good, legally binding reasons to go down whatever route they doI agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.
fairly sure it wastn't the PL who nominated the panelist, it was Uefa, who had brought the chargesI agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 14,933
fairly sure it wastn't the PL who nominated the panelist, it was Uefa, who had brought the charges
To be fair to @SilverFox2 , there has been so much going on it's difficult to remember who is the fuckor and who is the fuckee at any given time. Football these days, eh?
The last desperate act of a drowning man.I agree and hope that they act in a totally unbiased manner.
However, I recall even CAS verdict was 2 to 1 with the PL nominated panelist voting against us.