PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

tolmie's hairdoo said:
That would only be the start. A permanent stain rubber stamped on the club in the history books, lawsuits in excess of £200m, commercial partners withdrawing support, future players not wanting to damage their own brands, an owner who would not pass the stricter fit and proper persons test.

To be clear, this is a fight between life or footballing purgatory.

Which is why they can't win and we won't lose.
Click to expand...
Juventus have had more financial irregularity issues than this, which resulted in competion bans and relegations and it wasn't the end of them.
 
In reply to a rag trying to wind me up…….

It’ll all come out after the hearing, I’m confident that we will be cleared of the charges as we were by CAS, yes we were fined by UEFA for non co-operation but why should we co-operate when UEFA’s case was based on hacked e mails by der Spiegel where they were taken out of context. I’ve said for years there is a vendetta against our club because we broke the “sky sports 4 monopoly” and those 4 don’t like it.
Look at a few more instances that are little known, Liverpool were fined for hacking our database of youth players, not even a headline on Sky or talkshite, Liverpool fans filmed wrecking our bus on arrival at Anfield, despite numerous videos available even now on you tube not one arrest by the police. United fans break into Old Trafford and get a high profile game against Liverpool postponed and no action taken, yet we were recently fined 10 million for coming out of the dressing room late on a few occasions.
2 clubs a few miles apart, one financially stable and recognised as one of the best run clubs in the league and one almost 1bn in debt.
I’ll leave it there.
 
wolviedinho said:
I know everyone goes on about how city can afford the best legal minds in the business but has anyone ever considered why Pannick would take a case that he is 100 percent going lose according to the esteemed media?

Purely monetary? Nah these fellas are loaded. His reputation will certainly take a hit if we end up losing with “irrefutable evidence”.

Game within games…

Twisting my melon man -:)
Click to expand...

His reputation is unlikely to take a hit. Each case is unique and it's never really as clear cut as win or lose. Simon Jordan says we lost the UEFA case with CAS remember! I would expect the calmness within City (based on the rumours) to be because Pannick has advised on each and every charge and its chance of success/failure. He'll have advised them on how to manage the process with the PL from day 1. He knows how to argue a point, which case law to rely upon, which words to use and all the tricks in the book which is why he costs so much.

The failure to cooperate is going to hit us. I can't see how it wouldn't. Similarly to CAS, you have to cooperate with a sporting body in order for it to carry out its duty. We'll have arguments around why we didn't, but I would expect us to get short shrift and be fined. Again, I'd anticipate Pannick has a fair amount of evidence to justify why we didn't cooperate and, if it gets to the sanction stage, why it should be a financial and not sporting penalty.

Being cleared of all charges is a 6-0 win over the rags.
Being cleared of all but the non-cooperation and getting a fine is a 6-1 win. You celebrate both the same!
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
Who is Jaber Mohammed? Delaney is waffling on about him as if he is key to us being done.

I thought I’d asked on this thread earlier but it was unintentionally put in the media one.
Click to expand...

It's to do with the Etisalat transaction looked at by UEFA. He arranged payment of 30 million to MCFC on behalf of ADUG in respect of the sponsorship in advance of the receipt of the cash by ADUG from Etisalat. Etisalat later reimbursed ADUG.

Why did ADUG pay instead of Etisalat? Because the new contract with Etisalat stated Etisalat> ADUG> MCFC as the payment method.

Why did they pay in advance? Because the contract hadn't been signed and the parties were operating under a binding HoA. Etisalat, with their regulatory and statutory requirements, couldn't pay until the contract was signed.

It's all in the CAS award.
 
Last edited:
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