PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Prestwich_Blue said:
I looked at it again. It's here if anyone else wants to read it: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...-City-did-cheat-Premier-League-FFP-rules.html

The email was from Pearce, using his Executive Council email, sorting out an issue with the payment to Etihad from the EC, which hadn't been calculated correctly. We already knew that the EC funded the majority of that sponsorship so that's no revelation. In it, he uses the term "we" to refer to City but says "...I have underpaid you". That was jumped on by Harris, in the MoS piece above, to show that Pearce had lied to CAS when he denied arranging any payments to Etihad.

On one level it does seem to contradict that denial but, as we know, those emails were used incredibly selectively. There could easily be other interpretations of that email, including that Pearce was asked to sort out the problem on misaligned payments on behalf of the EC, or that his denial was based on not being the person who made the sponsorship arrangement on behalf of the EC. Or that "arranged" was interpreted by him as being the person who actually made the transfer. Who knows? In that email he appears to be doing some arithmetic and sorting out with Etihad how they want to correct the mistake.

But at the end of the day, even if Pearce had blatantly lied, it's a complete red herring. It has no bearing on the central charge of equity funding being disguised as sponsorship revenue. The Executive Council provided the additional money to Etihad and whether it was Pearce, Sheikh Mohammed, some other functionary or Uncle Tom fucking Cobbleigh. it makes zero difference to the overall outcome. As I said, total grasping at straws.
Click to expand...

A load of Cobbleighs then?
 
Stoned Rose said:
Like I’ve said, I could email you now saying Ive just bummed Michelle Keegan in her city kit. I could go into deep detail about it.

But if I didn’t bum her, and there’s evidence I didn’t, ie she says it never happened she’s never even met me before, the emails don’t mean anything.

It’s the actual action carried out (or not) that matters not an email.
Click to expand...
Best analogy award 2024
 
Ok, I’ll bite on this and know doubt get stick for not being super confident, fun at parties or simply a rag/ bin dipper.

CAS we won and we heard snippets, such as first day unsure, but quite a few indicated second day had gone well and if I remember right 3rd day finished early.

We have agreed to a 12 week trail with the PL, the legal team will be aware of our evidence/ witness statements and also there’s,

Yes, they are on the clock and probably not fully against stringing it out, but they are also professional.

There has to be A LOT more to this one then CAS.

The idea the PL have no evidence seems unlikely.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Which emails were these that "admit" the allegations? I have seen emails and attachments that talk about AD sponsorships as "shareholder funding" and I have seen the emails where Pearce takes it on himself to "arrange" some payments having stated to CAS that he had categorically never arranged any payments.

Are you thinking of any other emails?
Click to expand...
What you have seen emails that show disguised equity funding ? And prove the allegations that’s a new one
 
norman said:
.
...As for non cooperation City strived might and main to restrict the information they were required to provide including an application to the Commercial Court and subsequent appeal, both of which they lost but if subsequently City did provide the information having effectively been obliged to do so by the Court’s decision then at worst they could be deemed to have employed delaying tactics and may be subject to a penalty under the good faith provisions of the EPL...
Click to expand...
The judge in the appeal noted that the PL had submitted that our challenge via the court case had been 'tactical', but neither the original Merits Judge or the subsequent appeal court 'made any such findings'.
Part of the judges reasoning for finding against our appeal (against disclosure of the existence of the court case) was that City had a 'legitimate interest in ensuring a fair procedure' was being followed and he therefore found it 'difficult to see' how making the existence of the dispute public would lead to any real prejudice...

If the PL's non-cooperation charge is based on us taking that dispute to court, and we have subsequently abided with the court ruling, two judges have pretty much already said it was in our interest to seek clarification and dismissed the PL claim that we were doing it for tactical reasons.
 
The only evidence likely to uphold the serious charges against City will have been in City or Etihads hands or their accountants.

Does anyone think, if it did exist, we would meekly hand it over on request to Masters and the cartel when denial of its very existence is sufficient and likely unimpeachable.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
From what I remember, the issue around Pearce was him telling CAS that he hadn't arranged a payment.
The emails appeared to show him telling how the payment should be made.

I read it as different interpretation in what 'arranging' meant, and didn't think it would be hard to negate any questions.
Click to expand...

That was my view as well. Pearce is a smart guy with smart lawyers. He will be able to explain why there is no contradiction between him categorically not "arranging" any payments whilst at the same time "arranging" payments in some emails. The other issues raised, while seeming to be incriminating, can also be explained reasonably despite Twat/Harris not being able to think of a single one.

As ever, the much more persuasive evidence is what can be proven by the actual accounting.
 
Silva2021 said:
Ok, I’ll bite on this and know doubt get stick for not being super confident, fun at parties or simply a rag/ bin dipper.

CAS we won and we heard snippets, such as first day unsure, but quite a few indicated second day had gone well and if I remember right 3rd day finished early.

We have agreed to a 12 week trail with the PL, the legal team will be aware of our evidence/ witness statements and also there’s,

Yes, they are on the clock and probably not fully against stringing it out, but they are also professional.

There has to be A LOT more to this one then CAS.

The idea the PL have no evidence seems unlikely.
Click to expand...

Of course the PL has more "evidence". They have had access to much more information from the club, basically all the relevant emails (not just those leaked by der Spiegel in 2018) and, I would imagine, all the club's relevant accounting information over a much longer investigation. No-one sensible is claiming they don't have more "evidence".

The point is that, firstly, even if they have a hundred times as many emails, they still have the same problem UEFA had at CAS, which is that they prove nothing and, secondly, that the real incriminating evidence (in the very unlikely case there is any) would be held externally and to which they have had no access.

So, while a hundred times the number of emails may increase their evidential weight and some of the things discussed in those emails may seem incriminatory, that "evidence" will, imho, be trumped by the witness statements and financial accounting from external parties that the club can choose to provide, in the form and to the extent they want, to counter the PL's "evidence", as at CAS.
 
bluenova said:
I'd agree that the reporting deliberately ignored any hint of responsibility on the side of Liverpool fans.

However, the different routes to the ground were the main reason why Madrid fans didn't have issues. Liverpool's route was crazy, with numerous bottle necks.
Click to expand...
We managed it for Istanbul. There were no bottlenecks, just mile upon mile of queues. The difference was, we set off early.
Oh and we all had tickets.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
That's his Get Out Of Jail Free card, that some on here are buying to be all magnanimous and lovely. Facts are, he's researching (badly, granted), writing, getting stuff published, responding, receiving payments, making decisions.
Not mentally ill, despite the tragedy that befell him - and many of us too. He's made the autonomous decision to be completely against us. Fck him.
Click to expand...
I hope his next shit is a sea urchin
 
GaudinoMotors said:
That's his Get Out Of Jail Free card, that some on here are buying to be all magnanimous and lovely. Facts are, he's researching (badly, granted), writing, getting stuff published, responding, receiving payments, making decisions.
Not mentally ill, despite the tragedy that befell him - and many of us too. He's made the autonomous decision to be completely against us. Fck him.
Click to expand...

The thing about Harris is that I saw him on a podcast with Lineker and he was perfectly reasonable about Everton, Forest, what was likely to happen to Leicester and even about why the City case was much more complex than any of the others. No vitriol and no conspiracy stuff. He seems to turn it on and off when he wants. Which made me think (for a moment at least) that it's some sort of performance art for Twitter.

So I am torn between him being a complete psychopath with DID caused by personal trauma, or someone who is just out to make a living and has fooled me into thinking the former.

I don't like the second option so much :(
 
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