PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Ric]

 

[remember arthur mann]

You are and old softie.

I`m a vindictive ****, I want all our detractor ruined financially, money, assets every thing. I want them and their families left destitute, potless, penniless and without a roof over their heads.

Is that all? I'd go further than that !

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Still really pains me that City got in bed with the Super League. We could have had such a huge win from a PR perspective by staying away from it and showing we care about the domestic game. A serious own goal that.

Having said that, perhaps the play was more through hope that joining the cartel would alleviate their opposition to us behind the scenes and prevent them from pushing for charges or unlawful rule changes that significantly harm us.

City aren't particularly bothered by what the media think as long as commercial partners are still writing cheques.

A part of me still thinks/hopes we went into it so we could then leave it and fuck the idea up.

We were the first to gtfo of it irrespective of the media pushing Chelsea as the first to come out.

 

[hammocity]

What was the reason they were given more mitigation for COVID than other clubs?

That indeed is the big question. According to their apologists it hit their Sponsorship levels harder than any other club, it's not the "proper" COVID rules of 2020 - 2021 when every club lost money, it's later years whereby they claim they couldn't raise Sponsorship to the levels previously reached due to COVID.

It's quite simple they historically failed but have said it won't happen again.

No punishment like Forest and Everton, the former failed because they waited to sell Brennan Johnson to the Spuds at a date whereby they got a higher fee for the player but it meant they breached PSR by a couple of months, it was ridiculous really, they made a higher profit on a player but were criticised for waiting, if they had sold "on time" their profits would have been less but they were punished under profit rules, it's bizarre.

Seemingly any losses for the Rags are deemed ok because they'll make a profit in the future.

Nottingham Forest docked four points for Premier League financial rules breach

Nottingham Forest have received a four-point deduction for breaching the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules

www.theguardian.com

 

[dubblue]

They claimed it was lost revenue for not being able to have a summer tour during Covid.

Yet still spent the guts of £200m that summer. It’s farcical. They’ve been let off the hook big time.

 

[bigA]

Same here - I sincerely hope that ever since that first UEFA accusation we have been 'acquiring' filth on all our detractors... fire with fire.
When our name is cleared I'm envisaging a scene like the end of the Godfather - Mansour sat there whilst everyone gets their come uppance!

Hopefully Goldbridge gets a Moe Greene special whilst in his bedroom.

 

[hammocity]

Hopefully Goldbridge gets a Moe Greene special whilst in his bedroom.

Or like Luca Brasi "he sleeps with the fishes".

 

[thismeansfour]

Right and that was worthy of £39m more than other clubs? Is this just a case of them making a better argument than other clubs, or was it a rule that they've relaxed for the rags?

Stefan covered this well on Talksport. United chanced their arm with the Premier League on their losses during that period and the prem agreed (interestingly Uefa didn't) Every other club put in their losses for covid and all was agreed. So they didnt get allowed a greater loss whilst others got declined, they simply accepted everybody's loss sheets.

 

[Rory Bluelow]

When City win on the substantive allegations, Masters will be gone, a new CEO will be appointed without undue influence, the IR will come in and City will be well placed, imo.

Any attempt to reignite a super league will be shot down by fans again. The cartel clubs may want to try but they don't understand the football culture in the UK. They just see it as business.

Khaldoon has pointedly differentiated the Senior Execs at the Premier League. He goes out of his way to praise the Chair, Allison Brittain, but totally ignores CEO Masters - who is persona non grata at the Club. When City win their “case”, Masters will definitely be sacked and depending on the events leading up to issuing City’s charges (who advised, authorised the “weaponised” charges and why) it may be that the PL’s Legal Head/General Counsel has to go as well, and possibly terminate their relationship with their external Law firm. Beyond that I think Khaldoon will mend his fences with Brittain (he may have done so already) and the new regime at PL.
As you say, the super league won’t happen and the red shirts/Spurs will just have to get back to trying to beat us on the pitch - instead of shenanigans behind our back in the corridors of power.
As for the morons who endlessly call us cheats etc, that will fade especially if we have an even-handed regime running the PL.
I’m very optimistic and the end of this hearing can’t come soon enough - I’ve just a gut feeling it may not take quite as long as being currently suggested.
The Khaldoon stuff regarding Brittain is very obvious…the rest is conjecture.

 

[Champions again in 2012]

That indeed is the big question. According to their apologists it hit their Sponsorship levels harder than any other club, it's not the "proper" COVID rules of 2020 - 2021 when every club lost money, it's later years whereby they claim they couldn't raise Sponsorship to the levels previously reached due to COVID.

It's quite simple they historically failed but have said it won't happen again.

No punishment like Forest and Everton, the former failed because they waited to sell Brennan Johnson to the Spuds at a date whereby they got a higher fee for the player but it meant they breached PSR by a couple of months, it was ridiculous really, they made a higher profit on a player but were criticised for waiting, if they had sold "on time" their profits would have been less but they were punished under profit rules, it's bizarre.

Seemingly any losses for the Rags are deemed ok because they'll make a profit in the future.

Nottingham Forest docked four points for Premier League financial rules breach

Nottingham Forest have received a four-point deduction for breaching the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules

www.theguardian.com

If i remember correctly they had a sponsorship deal with team viewer that they (team viewer) simply couldnt afford. When neverton made a claim for loss of sponsorship due to russia's invasion of ukraine they got short shrift at the tribunal hearing as apparently sponsorships come and go and clubs need to factor that in!!!

As i said this is if i have remembered correctly

 

[Rory Bluelow]

Stefan covered this well on Talksport. United chanced their arm with the Premier League on their losses during that period and the prem agreed (interestingly Uefa didn't) Every other club put in their losses for covid and all was agreed. So they didnt get allowed a greater loss whilst others got declined, they simply accepted everybody's loss sheets.

They were very clever.

 

[foggy1974]

My seemingly sensible brother in law (rag) is convinced if we “get let off” its because we bribed “The FA”.

This is what we are up against.
I asked him what the fuck its got to do with the FA anyway and how any bribe would go down.

He just said “money talks”

:))

Shows his level of stupidity

Why wait until we've been hung drawn & quartered in the media, paid Pannick & his lawyers 5k a day to go to the independent commission, to bribe them at the last minute. If we would have bribed the PL then it would have been more worthwile to do it before the PL dropped the bombshell of 115 alleged breaches. We could have paid the PL £1m in hush money, like the dippers

 

[hammocity]

Stefan covered this well on Talksport. United chanced their arm with the Premier League on their losses during that period and the prem agreed (interestingly Uefa didn't) Every other club put in their losses for covid and all was agreed. So they didnt get allowed a greater loss whilst others got declined, they simply accepted everybody's loss sheets.

That's not what he said according to this:

Explained: Why Man Utd were given 'exceptional £40m allowance no other Premier League club had' as Red Devils avoid PSR penalties despite financial losses | Goal.com UK

Manchester United posted a £40m ($51m) loss related to Covid but were able to avoid a PSR punishment from the Premier League.

www.goal.com

 

[waspish]

Stefan covered this well on Talksport. United chanced their arm with the Premier League on their losses during that period and the prem agreed (interestingly Uefa didn't) Every other club put in their losses for covid and all was agreed. So they didnt get allowed a greater loss whilst others got declined, they simply accepted everybody's loss sheets.

Because who asses them are there mates

 

[thismeansfour]

That's not what he said according to this:

Explained: Why Man Utd were given 'exceptional £40m allowance no other Premier League club had' as Red Devils avoid PSR penalties despite financial losses | Goal.com UK

Manchester United posted a £40m ($51m) loss related to Covid but were able to avoid a PSR punishment from the Premier League.

www.goal.com

I will give it a read. On Talksport he was basically saying they haven't done anything wrong, the premier league accepted their large claims of losses and other clubs should have followed suit.

 

[thismeansfour]

Because who asses them are there mates

But if other clubs put in say 6M and are happy that was their figure, then the prem accept that was their figure, then it is on them for putting a low number in no? Prem accepted it and Uefa didn't so it is clearly dodgy.

 

[TheKippaxM14Blue]

They were very clever.

It couldnt be just that though. They couldnt submit those loss figures without knowing for a fact they wouldnt be disputed/Charged.

They would be completely open to a huge points deduction. They confidently spent hundreds of millions in the preceding transfer windows knowing that they wouldnt be punished further down the line.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Shows his level of stupidity

Why wait until we've been hung drawn & quartered in the media, paid Pannick & his lawyers 5k a day to go to the independent commission, to bribe them at the last minute. If we would have bribed the PL then it would have been more worthwile to do it before the PL dropped the bombshell of 115 alleged breaches. We could have paid the PL £1m in hush money, like the dippers

So if City’s legal team get this chucked in the bin in front of an independent panel appointed by the Premier League. It means the highest sports court in the land in CAS have agreed with City and then also a three person panel who City didn’t appoint. Where will these people have left to go on the mental gymnastics that City brown enveloped their way out of it?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Yes, but after we’ve taken legal action against the Premier League and the red cartel. We have previous with Uefa too. If we play our cards right which I believe we will, then no one can mess us about again and we will stamp our authority. The Super League would then be run fairly.

:) Fair enough. We can agree to disagree.

 

[donkinho]

Apologies if already asked, but I've not been on the forum for a few days and haven't got the time to plough through hundreds of pages. With regard to United's losses, I believe they were allowed to deduct £40m for Covid, and £35m for the expenses of the club sale, but weren't their 3 year losses around £240m ??? If so, even with those discounted, the 3 year losses would still be around £165m which is STILL around £60m more than permitted losses under PSR ??