PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[mad4city]

For sure, we are still guilty of the UEFA charges in the eyes of many despite the CAS ruling.
But it floats both ways because if we're found guilty most blues won't accept we are guilty of anything at all, more that it's in someway corrupt.
We already have views such as this before anything has been published. With the greatest of respect there is not enough in the public domain for the poster to come to this conclusion factually.
And there is the issue, in the eyes of others we will be forever guilty but in the eyes of blues we will be forever innocent, the actual hearing will be irrelevant to those views!

View attachment 128219

Guilt "in the eyes of many" whilst disheartening is ultimately irrelevant.
When City emerge from this fiasco largely unscathed, "the many" will still retain their jaundiced eyes.
Not to put too fine a point on it, fuck them.
In my opinion, Zeigler stirred up this hornet's nest so that he could bury the story he tweeted underneath it. The one that said City had won some/ lost some of the PSR case.
Now, a fair-minded person might have led with that world exclusive on the premise that winning some points was proof that the PL had acted illegally and MCFC had been vindicated in their pursuance of legal action.
Not Zeigler. Zeigler is a **** who muddied the waters.
Not having a go at you but fuck "in the eyes of many". If they think that way, they don't know what they are looking at.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

That article is several months old.

It’s the one several of us complained about and forced them to change as it has classic lines like “when will Man City be punished” which rather assumed guilt ;-)

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Can you explain why or even how you think it will? Given everything we have seen to date.

The various interpretations and suggestions of guilt and getting away with it will continue, whatever way the verdict goes. It is naive to think otherwise imo.

Sadly yes. And if we beat the charges then the narrative will just return to state owned / sportswashing

We are the bad guys in the pantomime

 

[Gone for a Burton]

The bottom line is this, the club does not care about the press we have been slagged off to high heaven and back again ever since the sheikh took over, it is thinly veiled racism by the old boys in the british press and that is why the club dont pay them any mind, they are not about winning the hearts and minds of a dying medium and fans of clubs who will hate us no matter what we do , they are about winning trophies and being the biggest club in the us and making inroads in japan, china etc etc, the clubs aims are so much bigger than giving a fuck about what matt lawton, simon jordan, the daily mail or some twat on x thinks and so while it may be annoying to people on here it is just a drop in the ocean for where the club is now and when khaldoon says once and for all he means the bullshit from the pl stops he is well aware that the bullshit from the racist media and pathetic rivals will never stop so he doesnt try and convince those idiots, he just laughs as we keep on winning and so should we.

100%.

City's only focus is winning this case on a "Once and for all" basis....no if's...but's...maybe's.

They understand fans tribalism and also the fact that City's growing fan base is young and international.

Youngsters don't give a flyer about the legal stuff they're interested in Jack & Erling and winning etc.

However, if the UK media 'cross the line' with their reporting, I'd not be surprised if the clubs response was significantly more vigorous than in the past.

Warnings of cease & desist may be the start.

"Once and for all" has got a song or chant in there somewhere....now that would be fun !!

 

[Gazza]

Dominoes is a **** of a company - irrespective of their pathetic unfunny jibes. Have they ever done the same hilarious stuff to dippers or rags? I didn’t think so

I hate them if only for the fact that an uninsured delivery driver of theirs wrote my car off (after I'd just spent a grand to get it through the MOT).

 

[TinFoilHat]

Masters on Talkshite saying he can give any details of the case or timelines because that would affect the case.

Yet some **** is leaking like a sieve to The Times.I hope the club gets the appropriate sanctions against the leaker.

 

[mancboy]

100% agree but difficult to prove?

it would have been up until the leaks about our legal action, it would have been before the hateful eight wrote a letter demanding that we be punished, they are the two that spring to mind im sure theres more.

 

[M18CTID]

I know @projectriver has already debunked the notion that clubs could sue us directly but I find it beyond laughable that these articles never cover the opposite outcome to us being found guilty and what action WE might take as a club if we're cleared. And City's official position about no wrongdoing and having irrefutable evidence of that always seems to be chucked in as an afterthought about 3 fucking paragraphs in!

 

[blueste41]

We are close to evens to win the league because they want to minimise the payouts if we win. We are 16/1 to go down to draw mugs into throwing money on it thinking the bookies have an inside scoop

I'm a betting trader, we don't set the odds you do by choosing which outcome to put your money on. The more money that goes on a particular outcome the lower the odds of that outcome becomes. It has to be that way because we work on something called an overround, essentially this means the odds are adjusted so whatever the actual outcome is we make the same profit.
The difference in odds of us winning the league and being relegated are irrelevant because those two markets are independent of each other.
The true odds of a market are more indicative at betting exchanges where the odds are set by traders buying and selling each side of the market at a price others are willing to accept (in much the same way stocks are bought and sold).
If you look at the trades for the two markets you mention you will see that they are not that dissimilar to the odds at the bookies.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.229393513

 

[blueste41]

6/1 at Boyle Sports and 16s Bet365 , if City where less than even money I would be worried but they are not so am not

See above, essentially what your seeing is public opinion.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I know @projectriver has already debunked the notion that clubs could sue us directly but I find it beyond laughable that these articles never cover the opposite outcome to us being found guilty and what action WE might take as a club if we're cleared. And City's official position about no wrongdoing and having irrefutable evidence of that always seems to be chucked in as an afterthought about 3 fucking paragraphs in!

But that would be of no interest whatsoever to the braindeads and fuckwits who believe the shite that the media feed to them.

 

[Kippax77]

Expect the 'hearing outcome' to be amplified x 1000 by the media everytime either the rags, dippers or arses lose a game during this season

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Expect the 'hearing outcome' to be amplified x 1000 by the media everytime either the rags, dippers or arses lose a game during this season

as night follows day ................

 

[Jack74]

See above, essentially what your seeing is public opinion.

Its not mate .

If you have lost and won as much as I have done gambling you might get my point , hey ho no big deal but am telling you now if City go on odds on ( I don't think they will ) they could be a problem or to.

 

[blueparrot]

Its not mate .

If you have lost and won as much as I have done gambling you might get my point , hey ho no big deal but am telling you now if City go on odds on ( I don't think they will ) they could be a problem or to.

It is, lots of misinformed people out there will put money on relegation this season the bookies will cover themselves. Even if found guilty towards the end of this season the most likely outcome would be a point deduction for next season not this,they wouldn't want to invalidate all this seasons results.

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

Genuinely don’t care. Every logical thought points to no way they can prove anything, even if it happened. If the Premier League had evidence that City were basically behaving fraudulently then they would have to inform the Police and HMRC? This is the new bread and circuses as The Premier League is deemed by themselves to be uncompetitive.

 

[TonyM]

Who writes this yoda speak nonsense?

"club believes that the outcome will be a refraining from pronouncing a punishment ruling due to lack of evidence"

Syntax in he does not.

 

[manimanc]

I know @projectriver has already debunked the notion that clubs could sue us directly but I find it beyond laughable that these articles never cover the opposite outcome to us being found guilty and what action WE might take as a club if we're cleared. And City's official position about no wrongdoing and having irrefutable evidence of that always seems to be chucked in as an afterthought about 3 fucking paragraphs in!

I'd sue every single person involved in this farce about the charges that has said wrong or accused us.

From the shithead in the mail Herbert to the prick masters, I'd take every one of them to the cleaners and bankrupt them.

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

6/1 at Boyle Sports and 16s Bet365 , if City where less than even money I would be worried but they are not so am not

Your average punter willing to spunk £50 on City to go down based purely on hate and false hope has little bearing on a weighty political and legal matter.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I get that, but if the verdict was no punisment for lack of evidence that would be interpreted very differently to No evidence of any wrong doing.It would allow inuendo to continue,mind you any verdict will do that too.

That tweet sounds like it was generated using AI, or it should be tried for crimes against the English language.

We can't be punished if the IC doesn't find that the PL's evidence is sufficient to show we breached the stated rules about accurate accounts, etc. There is a scenario that lies between that, and knowing material misstatement of our finances, where the IC finds that we did breach some rules (let's say those relating to the Mancini contract) but the amounts involved were immaterial in the overall scheme of things, that we'd acted in accordance with professional advice and that the rules were ambiguous or unclear.

It's possible, in that latter scenario, that we might get a slap on the wrist without any substantive punishment.