PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Kinkys Left Foot]

The accusations were that he arranged funding to Etihad.

But it doesn't matter who arranged it as long as it didn't come from ADUG. But even if it had come from ADUG (which it didn't) CAS determined that it was fair value in terms of the price paid and that Etihad received full consideration in terms of what they got out of it.

This is the bit I have difficulty with in understanding the PLs position regarding the equity funding allegations.

At CAS they know the evidence from the emails has been properly considered against rebuttal evidence provided by CIty including the full run of the emails and therefore the missing context, evidence from City (Pearce) and evidence from Etihad, (didn't Etihad's representative say the allegation they only paid 8 million was ridiculous considering the sponsorship valuation), expert witness testimony from an accounts expert regarding the contents of Etihad's accounts and ADUG accounts (confirming no payments were made, particularly from HHSM or ADUG, but none of sufficient value, or smaller multiples thereof to cover the balance of the sponsorship value.

No other evidence other than the emails was offered by UEFA.

The above provided the basis from which the justices formed their "No evidence" opinion that equity funding took place.

So what possible evidence could be available (that City or Etihad would reasonably release to the PL if they were guilty) to prove such conduct did in fact take place? I strongly suspect there is none.

If there is none then the PL are relying solely that the IC will reach a finding contrary to the CAS justices (ignoring the 2-1 majority debacle). Isn't that going out on a limb somewhat with paper thin reasoning to believe that outcome is possible, considering the more likely outcome?

The more you try and reason it the more perplexing it becomes. Yet the PL are prepared to throw a 5 year, £20 Million "Hail Mary" at it.

Should things go in our favour as I suspect then the PL will get everything they deserve in the fallout. If it were possible I personally think we should pursue them for reputational damages should it be such a spectacular failure. The whole thing will have proved nothing more than a witch hunt with a show trial based on the flimsiest of evidence on already litigated matters.

 

[CC1]

This is the bit I have difficulty with in understanding the PLs position regarding the equity funding allegations.

At CAS they know the evidence from the emails has been properly considered against rebuttal evidence provided by CIty including the full run of the emails and therefore the missing context, evidence from City (Pearce) and evidence from Etihad, (didn't Etihad's representative say the allegation they only paid 8 million was ridiculous considering the sponsorship valuation), expert witness testimony from an accounts expert regarding the contents of Etihad's accounts and ADUG accounts (confirming no payments were made, particularly from HHSM or ADUG, but none of sufficient value, or smaller multiples thereof to cover the balance of the sponsorship value.

No other evidence other than the emails was offered by UEFA.

The above provided the basis from which the justices formed their "No evidence" opinion that equity funding took place.

So what possible evidence could be available (that City or Etihad would reasonably release to the PL if they were guilty) to prove such conduct did in fact take place? I strongly suspect there is none.

If there is none then the PL are relying solely that the IC will reach a finding contrary to the CAS justices (ignoring the 2-1 majority debacle). Isn't that going out on a limb somewhat with paper thin reasoning to believe that outcome is possible, considering the more likely outcome?

The more you try and reason it the more perplexing it becomes. Yet the PL are prepared to throw a 5 year, £20 Million "Hail Mary" at it.

Should things go in our favour as I suspect then the PL will get everything they deserve in the fallout. If it were possible I personally think we should pursue them for reputational damages should it be such a spectacular failure. The whole thing will have proved nothing more than a witch hunt with a show trial based on the flimsiest of evidence on already litigated matters.

Corruption & desperation don’t heed the truth or facts

 

[melrose40yarder]

Some dickhead on talkshite this morning between 5 and 6 said we all know what the charges are.I called them which i never nornally would and asked to be put through so said dickhead could tell me what the charges were guess what they would not put me through.I asked the person if they could ask the presenter to outline the charges so the listeners know what they are they didnt.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

Not so, imo. The combination of the filing requirement with the acting in bad faith allegation allows them, I think, to allege that filing accounts with an audit report the board knew to be materially wrong in respect of sponsorship income, gave the club a sporting advantage. Makes sense to me, even though I doubt very much the club did that, or that the PL could prove it even if they did.

Wasn't the argument that in some of the earlier allegations the earlier PL rule book didn't make out the bad faith element and that following the Leicester decision that the rules (E3) had to be interpreted as stated and as such we complied with the E3 requirement as worded?

 

[Manc Born & Bred]

SSIAC

 

[Keeper!]

SSIAC

View attachment 131559

Simple Simon, he will be put in his place by the boss as always.

 

[mancboy]

Teabag mouthing off again, hopefully gets slotted in the head one day ;)

he has to talk about city to try and make his failing league stay relevant, ask yourself this why is he speaking to pl clubs about citys charges, there is no crossover apart from it being a football story.

 

[cheekybids]

Bring it on, it’s getting boring rag and dippers supporters comforting themselves as this is the reason their clubs aren’t as successful as City. The rug needs pulling up from beneath them and the reality that the club is where it is through sporting merit, a lot of them will give up football all together but it’s no great loss.

From the cunts who claim technicality yet haven’t failed premier league PSR last 2 years despite being the only club allowed to claim £35m for covid allowance & £45m for selling shares…….

It makes you realise how important the media & it isn’t for selling newspapers. Its having huge following to get interaction & cause outrage.

Everton & Forest can’t be outraged at the Rags cos there’s no stories for them to comment on.

 

[Gazza]

SSIAC

View attachment 131559

Fascinating why? nothing's changed since the last time you asked him.

 

[M18CTID]

Some dickhead on talkshite this morning between 5 and 6 said we all know what the charges are.I called them which i never nornally would and asked to be put through so said dickhead could tell me what the charges were guess what they would not put me through.I asked the person if they could ask the presenter to outline the charges so the listeners know what they are they didnt.

Even if these twats knew what the charges were (and most of them don't) it means fuck-all in terms of whether we're guilty or not!

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

This is the bit I have difficulty with in understanding the PLs position regarding the equity funding allegations.

At CAS they know the evidence from the emails has been properly considered against rebuttal evidence provided by CIty including the full run of the emails and therefore the missing context, evidence from City (Pearce) and evidence from Etihad, (didn't Etihad's representative say the allegation they only paid 8 million was ridiculous considering the sponsorship valuation), expert witness testimony from an accounts expert regarding the contents of Etihad's accounts and ADUG accounts (confirming no payments were made, particularly from HHSM or ADUG, but none of sufficient value, or smaller multiples thereof to cover the balance of the sponsorship value.

No other evidence other than the emails was offered by UEFA.

The above provided the basis from which the justices formed their "No evidence" opinion that equity funding took place.

So what possible evidence could be available (that City or Etihad would reasonably release to the PL if they were guilty) to prove such conduct did in fact take place? I strongly suspect there is none.

If there is none then the PL are relying solely that the IC will reach a finding contrary to the CAS justices (ignoring the 2-1 majority debacle). Isn't that going out on a limb somewhat with paper thin reasoning to believe that outcome is possible, considering the more likely outcome?

The more you try and reason it the more perplexing it becomes. Yet the PL are prepared to throw a 5 year, £20 Million "Hail Mary" at it.

Should things go in our favour as I suspect then the PL will get everything they deserve in the fallout. If it were possible I personally think we should pursue them for reputational damages should it be such a spectacular failure. The whole thing will have proved nothing more than a witch hunt with a show trial based on the flimsiest of evidence on already litigated matters.

That's precisely why they adopted the scatter gun approach to the charges. Even if (when) the major charges fail, but maybe some minor ones land (Mancini, No-Coop) they would have their own get out of jail card. It would prove their big dick energy to the IR and justify Masters saying to the red cartel :-

"we've done absolutely everything we could for you, as we promised, Daniel, it cost us a fortune, but we did it, now what about my payments to the Cayman Island account, you know the ones old uncle Joe promised, before he got imprisoned"...

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Make a complaint using this form - it only takes a minute to complete

Make A Complaint | Contact the BBC

www.bbc.co.uk

If enough people do it he’ll have to change the article. Which will piss him off and make him think twice when using the phrase again.

What’s the URL of the article?

Be polite in your complaint

it’s pointless with the BBC. I won’t waste my time with them any more. They don’t take complaints seriously. I know this with certainty from my own trusted sources at the BBC. The internal culture there stinks and will not change. It’s a same because some very good people work there.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

What was it Roan said after this tragedy? I don't seem to recall anything.

Before the bodies were cold Roan suggested the the young woman who died on the helicopter was more of the owners bit on the side rather than a PA/employee. True or not there was no need.

 

[Centurions]

But they haven’t floated on the NYSE have they…..unless I missed it. There was a rumour about 6 months that they were going to, but then zilch

2025 the earliest from a quick Google.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Just passing on what a mate of mine has said. He has a line of communication into the club and it's been reiterated recently that City are super confident of the outcome. Worth remembering that nobody can be 100% sure that we'll win of course even if we have a very strong case, and that's something Stefan has often pointed out.

Also, he heard that a lot of the charges won't even be discussed/have been dropped/thrown out. That squares with similar to what Tolmie said yonks ago. I for one am not sure on that particular aspect as I'd still expect all the charges to be considered when the panel sits even if the panel thinks some or all of them are not worth the paper they're written on?

I think the club sanctioning £400m investment into the Etihad tells you how confident they are. Obviously your mates words are reassuring too.

 

[Fordyboy46]

U

Simple Simon, he will be put in his place by the boss as always.

I'd love Pep to lay into the **** verbally obviously, but he won't sadly

 

[abu13]

The bit that I am really curious about is our "Irrifutable evidence".

Given that the case is set aside to last for 10-12 weeks what would happen if we present this evidence at the start of the process and the investigators agree that we are right. If this suddenly wiped 50% of the charges away then surely the whole process time is drastically reduced.

Will be interesting how this works out.

 

[City Raider]

We know anything about the panel yet?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Some dickhead on talkshite this morning between 5 and 6

Was that their actual age or mental age?

 

[Bald fraud]

On the morning of the CAS verdict, I was driving so had Talkshite on
It was a woman presenter along with two males (sure they were former footballers) and the build up to 9am, when the decision was officially released, was all about "what next for City when they're banned from Europe" etc

They went to the reporter outside CAS who spoke of the decision that City had been successful in its appeal, cleared of all the major charges and had the non cooperation fine reduced substantially

They went back to the studio and it was silence. They had no idea what to do next as the show had been scripted for City's guilt

Same with the kompany title winning goal. They were getting giddy in the talksport studio thinking we were gonna to blow it as the game went on. Then came vinnys thunderbastrd! They all just sat there gutted and couldn’t speak!