PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Beyond the obvious winning the case and getting damages, I suppose a 'success' could include the arbitration agreeing with the idea that the PL had treated City worse than other clubs (and maybe in cahoots with certain other clubs). That'd be timely ahead of the upcoming hearing
 
jimharri said:
Click to expand...

I get the impression that APT case is just laying the groundwork for the bigger case to better control the narrative rather than "blowing the doors off" so to speak.

Much of the case against City appears to be on related party transactions and success would underline that PL rules on associated party rules to date have been flimsy, not adequately drafted and open to interpretation.
 
skillman said:
Click to expand...

I'm very sceptical of date changes.

I'm aware Lord P probably has a big experienced team below him but I'd expect him to lead from the front and would assume that he's not sat at home on his backside waiting for this to start and is involved in other ongoing cases, his potential unavailability until the original date in November would render a 'quick start' unfeasible.
 
get ready for hell of a media campaign then next few months, I am sure media boys wanna whip up the pressure and bad media coverage as much as they can while the hearing is ongoing. whatsapp boys last hurrah and all that.

all I want to see a huge City win in the 115 case and Pep to renew on the back of it. imagine the tears of all rivals.

despite this I am not optimistic we can dodge every single bullet, they charged us with everything for a reason so something can stick.
 
chesterguy said:

Hearing into Man City’s 115 alleged breaches to start next month​

Premier League champions for past four years fighting threat of relegation as independent inquiry begins into charges that club broke Premier League financial rules

new
Martyn Ziegler
, Chief Sports Reporter
Monday August 12 2024, 8.00pm, The Times
City, after winning four successive Premier League titles, could face relegation if rule breach allegations are found against them

City, after winning four successive Premier League titles, could face relegation if rule breach allegations are found against them
ALAMY
The hearing against Manchester City on 115 alleged breaches of Premier League rules is set to start next month with the outcome known early in the new year.
The independent commission had been expected to start in November but sources with knowledge of the case have said that it is now due to begin in mid-to-late September, unless there are further legal delays.
The hearing has been scheduled to last ten weeks, with the commission members expected to deliver their verdict at the start of 2025. The outcome of City’s separate legal case brought against the Premier League’s associated party transactions (APT) rules is set to be revealed in the next two weeks, which would then allow the 115 charges hearing to take place earlier. There is a belief that City have achieved some successes in the arbitration hearing.
The Premier League declined to comment. Manchester City did not respond when approached by The Times.
It is alleged that City failed to supply full pay details of Mancini, right, and Touré, centre. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by the former City manager or player

It is alleged that City failed to supply full pay details of Mancini, right, and Touré, centre. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by the former City manager or player
ACTION IMAGES / LEE SMITH LIVEPIC
City are facing the threat of relegation from the Premier League if the most serious charges against them are proved. The alleged rule breaches include not providing accurate financial information for nine separate seasons, not providing full details of former manager Roberto Mancini’s pay over the four seasons he was at the club from 2009-13, and not providing full details of players’ remuneration — including that of the former midfielder Yaya Touré — over six seasons from 2010-11 to 2015-16.
Click to expand...
Toure has no allegiance to us whatsoever, he's never acknowledged the success he gained with us, I'm sure he would have bubbled us if we'd paid him illegally. I'm sure he'd be forthcoming with information as long as it didn't leave him open to HMRC action bit as he no longer lives in the UK he probably wouldn't give a fuck, doubt we'd have our ourselves at risk with him knowing his character.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
I'm very sceptical of date changes.

I'm aware Lord P probably has a big experienced team below him but I'd expect him to lead from the front and would assume that he's not sat at home on his backside waiting for this to start and is involved in other ongoing cases, his potential unavailability until the original date in November would render a 'quick start' unfeasible.
Click to expand...
Pannick will not be appearing. He analyses and recommends lines to be followed. He can do the work after his second glass of port (Taylor’s 63) any evening.
 
hammocity said:
Toure has no allegiance to us whatsoever, he's never acknowledged the success he gained with us, I'm sure he would have bubbled us if we'd paid him illegally. I'm sure he'd be forthcoming with information as long as it didn't leave him open to HMRC action bit as he no longer lives in the UK he probably wouldn't give a fuck, doubt we'd have our ourselves at risk with him knowing his character.
Click to expand...
Maybe “birthday cake” was code for naughty pay off ?
 
blue b4 the moon said:
I'm very sceptical of date changes.

I'm aware Lord P probably has a big experienced team below him but I'd expect him to lead from the front and would assume that he's not sat at home on his backside waiting for this to start and is involved in other ongoing cases, his potential unavailability until the original date in November would render a 'quick start' unfeasible.
Click to expand...
I would be absolutely blown away if city aren’t paying him to work exclusively for them until the case is over.
 
hammocity said:
Toure has no allegiance to us whatsoever, he's never acknowledged the success he gained with us, I'm sure he would have bubbled us if we'd paid him illegally. I'm sure he'd be forthcoming with information as long as it didn't leave him open to HMRC action bit as he no longer lives in the UK he probably wouldn't give a fuck, doubt we'd have our ourselves at risk with him knowing his character.
Click to expand...
I think it is interesting that the Ziegler article focuses heavily on the two minor allegations that Toure and Mancini were paid extra cash via legal freelance contracts. Ziegler is reporting it the way it has been briefed to him. He is not stressing the major multiple false accounting allegations. The Mancini allegations date back 15 years before FFP. What a witch-hunt this has been. The smear campaign continues. Clear and organised.
 
hammocity said:
Toure has no allegiance to us whatsoever, he's never acknowledged the success he gained with us, I'm sure he would have bubbled us if we'd paid him illegally. I'm sure he'd be forthcoming with information as long as it didn't leave him open to HMRC action bit as he no longer lives in the UK he probably wouldn't give a fuck, doubt we'd have our ourselves at risk with him knowing his character.
Click to expand...
The Mancini stuff is all legal. Essentially consultancy fees. But the PL say they breached their internal rules. The same applies to Toure. Presumably it was a legal tax reduction vehicle demanded by his agent. Routine and legal business practice in most industries.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
The Mancini stuff is all legal. Essentially consultancy fees. But the PL say they breached their internal rules. The same applies to Toure. Presumably it was a legal tax reduction vehicle demanded by his agent. Routine and legal business practice in most industries.
Click to expand...

If it’s deemed legal the Premier League’s argument ends up on rocky ground with Mancini’s wages and player image rights. This then becomes a civil matter where the limitations act comes into play where they can only go back 6 years from the point of discovery.
 
Maybe I'm way off on this one but could it be possible that we've been talking with the prem league for a while and we've admitted our guilt. Some sort of settlement has been agreed which would involve a huge fine and points deduction, but the hearing still has to take place anyway.
It's could be another reason as to why we aren't spending this summer.
 
Fordyboy46 said:
Maybe I'm way off on this one but could it be possible that we've been talking with the prem league for a while and we've admitted our guilt. Some sort of settlement has been agreed which would involve a huge fine and points deduction, but the hearing still has to take place anyway.
It's could be another reason as to why we aren't spending this summer.
Click to expand...
Would make no sense. First of all if Pep was a man of his word he would be gone as surely he would know by now we’ve pled guilty, also goes against everything Khaldoon has said too.
 
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