PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

KS55 said:
See also boozer, hooker, Yorker. (That’s enough ‘er’s. Ed.)
Click to expand...
Is that short for..

On Saturday the 19th of December 1998 whilst in York, I met up with a lady of the night. She was standing on the corner outside the public house I’d just frequented to partake in some much needed refreshments.
 
I'm Blue said:
Someone won’t be invited back on Talkshite
Click to expand...


Not one of them has the balls to ask "what evidence is there against them?" or "what should happen to the PL if they cannot prove their allegations?"

In respect of the most serious allegations the actual courts have already said the emails were a crock of shite and proved nothing, that what they inferred, was out of context and evidence supplied by City was to the contrary. I doubt any "Committee" is going to find otherwise.

The media have helped convince the "public" we are guilty and need to prove our innocence but of course this is not so. This is an arbitration hearing in front of a 3 man Committee Panel where the Premier League have to establish to the required standard of proof that their allegations are true. I do not believe they have sufficient compelling evidence for that to be so.

A none compliance finding would be liked being charged with murder, pleading not guilty as there was no body and no evidence and eventually being convicted of resisting arrest. Fuck Masters.
 
flapjack said:
isn't there a section that describes how if they had looked at the time-barred stuff, they see no reason why it would be any different to the other evidence provided? I did try reading through it all myself but can't find the specific section.... I'm sure I am remember reading that on here though
Click to expand...
This is a cut from the CAS media release. Here is the full version - essentially the key headlines for the press. It's a zero flim-flam account by which I have slain many a numpty.
 
flapjack said:
I was discussing this with a rival fan and he said, so how is the general feeling amongst city fans about the charges?
and I said well we think we are innocent as its basically the same case that CAS found us innocent, and his response was 'but they found you guilty it was just that it was time-barred'...so I responded (because I'm sure I read it on here), that actually they said, 'although some evidence is time-barred, from what they have seen there is no evidence to suggest it would be any different to what they have seen' or words to that effect....have I got that right?
Click to expand...
IMG_4161.jpeg
 
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
 
bigA said:
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
Click to expand...
much like with nuclear weapons the premier league has rumbled along on the principles of MASD and now they have ruffled the feathers of one of the teams which holds a sizeable amount of those weapons and if they dont want mutually assured self destruction they will try and find a way out of this which is what i think they have been trying to do for some time.
 
bigA said:
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
Click to expand...
No.
 
bigA said:
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the Panel will have to legally justify any "guilty as charged" decision.
If so the KCs involved are unlikely to risk their legal standing simply to appease a biased Judgement.
If they can legally prove City have been lying that makes all of us mugs for believing Mr K..
 
bigA said:
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
Click to expand...
Fanciful.
 
bigA said:
If (and that is a massive if) the case does go against us, does anyone think that City have managed to dig up enough dirt on the Premier League, The FA and other clubs, especially those who pushed the Premier League into bring those charges, to launch a devastating shit bomb upon them and bring the whole structure and hierachy of the Premier League crashing down around them? And if we did had enough shit on other clubs and the PL, are they shit scared of finding City guilty and are in fact looking for and possibly negotiating a deal to save their skins but we are not buying it?
Click to expand...

Naah. Not that.

But if the PL panel finds in favour of the PL, it doesn't stop there. Make no mistake, these allegations are a serious matter of financial irregularities and if they are "proven" they will be followed by criminal investigations. The result of the criminal investigations will be either prosecution or no prosecution. I can't see how anything could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (unless in the hugely remote possibility that the club firstly did what was alleged and secondly were stupid enough to leave evidence lying around) so the outcome would be the same. In which case, would the PL want to "sacrifice" a club and the professional reputations of some very serious people, only then to have their decision "overturned" by the criminal courts? I can't see them wanting to take that risk, imho. One of the reasons I can't imagine the decision on the most serious allegations will be unfavourable to the club. There are many others.

Quite a hole the PL have dug for themselves with the idiot referral of all those allegations.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Naah. Not that.

But if the PL panel finds in favour of the PL, it doesn't stop there. Make no mistake, these allegations are a serious matter of financial irregularities and if they are "proven" they will be followed by criminal investigations. The result of the criminal investigations will be either prosecution or no prosecution. I can't see how anything could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (unless in the hugely remote possibility that the club firstly did what was alleged and secondly were stupid enough to leave evidence lying around) so the outcome would be the same. In which case, would the PL want to "sacrifice" a club and the professional reputations of some very serious people, only then to have their decision "overturned" by the criminal courts? I can't see them wanting to take that risk, imho. One of the reasons I can't imagine the decision on the most serious allegations will be unfavourable to the club. There are many others.

Quite a hole the PL have dug for themselves with the idiot referral of all those allegations.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is the case.

This is a civil matter going through a private arbitration process, usually that's enough. Whatever the panel decides, doesn't necessarily mean there will be a criminal investigation. Was Roy Keane criminally charged for assaulting Haaland? Firstly someone has to complain to the right body (I think the DTI or Companies House). It also has to be in the public interest and there has to be sufficient evidence to prove false accounting. Is it in the public interest to punish City twice for the same thing? Add to that directors very rarely get prosecuted for anything like this unless HMRC think they're owed money or someone has directly lost a lot of money.

The two allegations relate to sponsorship deals (being worth less than stated and/or not paid by the sponsors but paid by a third party) and other third parties paying staff extra money (Mancini and Toure). I'm not certain that either of these are crimes (unless there are tax implications) even if they are true (I'm not sure they breach Premier League rules either!)

I might be wrong about the above, but the government haven't lost any money (in fact might have to repay City VAT/corp tax paid if this was proven) and no one has been directly hurt by it, so why would a criminal investigation or case follow? Who would pursue it?

I am not aware of the criminal courts over turning civil cases like this because by their very nature they are separate matters, between separate parties and have different burdens of proof and different rules/laws to assess them. Different outcomes are common, even if the fundamental issue is the same.

At the end of the day all this really is is a contractual dispute.

So no I don't think it is a fait acompli that a criminal investigation would follow.
 
TedofChume said:
I don't think this is the case.

This is a civil matter going through a private arbitration process, usually that's enough. Whatever the panel decides, doesn't necessarily mean there will be a criminal investigation. Was Roy Keane criminally charged for assaulting Haaland? Firstly someone has to complain to the right body (I think the DTI or Companies House). It also has to be in the public interest and there has to be sufficient evidence to prove false accounting. Is it in the public interest to punish City twice for the same thing? Add to that directors very rarely get prosecuted for anything like this unless HMRC think they're owed money or someone has directly lost a lot of money.

The two allegations relate to sponsorship deals (being worth less than stated and/or not paid by the sponsors but paid by a third party) and other third parties paying staff extra money (Mancini and Toure). I'm not certain that either of these are crimes (unless there are tax implications) even if they are true (I'm not sure they breach Premier League rules either!)

I might be wrong about the above, but the government haven't lost any money (in fact might have to repay City VAT/corp tax paid if this was proven) and no one has been directly hurt by it, so why would a criminal investigation or case follow? Who would pursue it?

I am not aware of the criminal courts over turning civil cases like this because by their very nature they are separate matters, between separate parties and have different burdens of proof and different rules/laws to assess them. Different outcomes are common, even if the fundamental issue is the same.

At the end of the day all this really is is a contractual dispute.

So no I don't think it is a fait acompli that a criminal investigation would follow.
Click to expand...

This is correct. I'd add that, if there were criminal allegations, the prosecuting authorities would not wait years for the civil action to be completed before starting an investigation.
 
TedofChume said:
I don't think this is the case.

This is a civil matter going through a private arbitration process, usually that's enough. Whatever the panel decides, doesn't necessarily mean there will be a criminal investigation. Was Roy Keane criminally charged for assaulting Haaland? Firstly someone has to complain to the right body (I think the DTI or Companies House). It also has to be in the public interest and there has to be sufficient evidence to prove false accounting. Is it in the public interest to punish City twice for the same thing? Add to that directors very rarely get prosecuted for anything like this unless HMRC think they're owed money or someone has directly lost a lot of money.

The two allegations relate to sponsorship deals (being worth less than stated and/or not paid by the sponsors but paid by a third party) and other third parties paying staff extra money (Mancini and Toure). I'm not certain that either of these are crimes (unless there are tax implications) even if they are true (I'm not sure they breach Premier League rules either!)

I might be wrong about the above, but the government haven't lost any money (in fact might have to repay City VAT/corp tax paid if this was proven) and no one has been directly hurt by it, so why would a criminal investigation or case follow? Who would pursue it?

I am not aware of the criminal courts over turning civil cases like this because by their very nature they are separate matters, between separate parties and have different burdens of proof and different rules/laws to assess them. Different outcomes are common, even if the fundamental issue is the same.

At the end of the day all this really is is a contractual dispute.

So no I don't think it is a fait acompli that a criminal investigation would follow.
Click to expand...
Does that include defamation? I mean by accusing (and finding the club of guilty) of fraud arent they opening themselves up to a counter claim of talking bollocks? (Or whatever the legal term would be)
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
Does that include defamation? I mean by accusing (and finding the club of guilty) of fraud arent they opening themselves up to a counter claim of talking bollocks? (Or whatever the legal term would be)
Click to expand...
Mr Masters, you are charged with talking bollocks and other high crimes and misdemeanours, how do you plead?
Masters: Not guilty by way of total incompetence.
 
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