PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Thaksinssoldier said:
That was excusable. Kids kits.

What was absolutely inexcusable was the giant “AIG remembers” banner hanging from their shithole after asking for sponsorships to be removed for the day. They just couldn’t help themselves. Grubby cunts.
Click to expand...
Not excusable for me. If City were respectful enough for our mascot not to be displaying our sponsor’s name on their shirt then United should’ve done the same with their mascots.

Also, let’s not forget that Ferguson didn’t even hang around to do a post-match interview, claiming he had to get a flight to South Africa to see his son. Not a fucking chance he skips that interview if they won that game. As my mate @gordondaviesmoustache would say, he was a disrespectful motherfucker.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I was meaning UEFA presumably have a good faith rule.

Anyway, the point still stands that UEFA is responsible for determining UEFA FFP compliance, not the PL. The PL is responsible for collecting and providing the information to UEFA and clubs are required by UEFA rules, I imagine, to provide accurate and complete information in good faith.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that UEFA set the rules but the PL have to 'sign off' our submission and are effectively the delegated authority for issuing the FFP licence.

It's a bit like getting insurance through a broker like Swinton. The insurer will supply the underwriting guidelines and rates but unless there's a problem, Swinton will issue the policy on their delegated authority.
 
People are clinging to the fact that some CAS stuff was dropped due to "time bar" issues.
They seem to have a sense, that was us "getting away with stuff" because of it. Not realising (or conveniently forgetting) that we may have had a solid defence against it, but also not being able to use/prove it.
Also when people use the word "heinous crimes" when talking about financial issues, you just know they are already biased and just want punishment no matter how innocent somebody is.
 
HorlockofFiretopMountain said:
No not looking for a conspiracy theory, there's plenty of those already. Just interested in understanding how the rules might work or be applied on this point. Thank you for the additional explanation.

I am also struggling to see how they would prove or gain proof that would support any of the serious allegations. My feeling is that City will have a robust explanation to refute any allegation they bring forward.
Click to expand...

Agreed about the proof. Seems to me the PL won't have had access during the investigation to the external information they need and won't have access to it in front of the panel, at least not in the form they would need it, to prove the serious allegations even if the club did do what is alleged.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Financially it is the most serious, and probably in the overall issue of deception. But we know from CAS that it's nonsense, so it's quite bizarre that the PL are going down that route. As we've said before, why is no one in the media making that connection?
Click to expand...
Because few of them are proper journalists who can be bothered to do something journalistic like, you know, actually reading the CAS judgement and understanding it. Just regurgitating the groupthink that we 'got away with it on a technicality'. However, the actual 'technicality' was that there wasn't sufficient evidence that anything wrong had been done.
 
freshie said:
Click to expand...

Jordan back to being a **** again and peddling conspiracy theories about the panel. I’d also like him to explain what the inconsistencies were in the witness statements given to CAS.
How Stefan manages to keep so calm in the face of such confrontational bullshit is beyond me!
 
If the press are outside the building taking photos of our legal team then you would expect photos of the witnesses to be taken too. Is it too early in the proceedings for witnesses to attend ?
 
M18CTID said:
Jordan back to being a **** again and peddling conspiracy theories about the panel. I’d also like him to explain what the inconsistencies were in the witness statements given to CAS.
How Stefan manages to keep so calm in the face of such confrontational bullshit is beyond me!
Click to expand...
He was so 'calm' he failed to counter any of Jordan's anti City bullshit.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Agreed about the proof. Seems to me the PL won't have had access during the investigation to the external information they need and won't have access to it in front of the panel, at least not in the form they would need it, to prove the serious allegations even if the club did do what is alleged.
Click to expand...
reading between lines they hope to discredit witnesses or one or more senior figures not showing up as all aged a few year since CAS
 
M18CTID said:
Jordan back to being a **** again and peddling conspiracy theories about the panel. I’d also like him to explain what the inconsistencies were in the witness statements given to CAS.
How Stefan manages to keep so calm in the face of such confrontational bullshit is beyond me!
Click to expand...
isnt he claiming another stolen email miraculouly turned up after CAS saying something other than witness statment
 
supercity88 said:
It's really hard to judge in this case, because whilst it's playing out behind closed doors there's immense public scrutiny. Any settlement is a sign of weakness from the PL and an admission of guilt from City. And without knowing what that was it's hard to make a true judgement. There could be a number of commercial reasons why City couldn't rather than wouldn't accept a settlement - in terms of an admission of guilt. And you'd expect the PL, aware of the optics, would have offered something that had a substantial impact on our chances of success this season.

There doesn't appear to be much difference with what's on the table here in terms of charges, and what UEFA levelled at us. And it's always positive to have case law, or in this instance, the CAS verdict, to quote and utilise as part of our defence this time around. I don't believe there's anything additional the PL have other than the hacked emails, although I could be wrong.

If you're turning up to an independent panel with the same accusations, even if rules and legislation differ, it's helpful as I said to point to the CAS verdict and provide their opinion on inflated sponsorships/sources of income etc.

I just cannot see the club settling regardless of what was on the table, when the public perception is that we're guilty. That might not change even with a "win" at the independent panel in terms of your social media content from rival fans, but it will have to from the media and anyone employed to comment or they open themselves to a legal battle of their own.
Click to expand...
I think your last point is very important. Any "win" that we get must be good enough to shut the media up. Rival fans are irrelevant since they are going to continue to peddle the lie that we are guilty, whatever happens.
 
John Wayne said:
I can't see City agreeing to any sort of settlement that involves a sporting sanction. I can't see the PL offering a settlement that doesn't include a sporting sanction. This will go all the way.
Click to expand...
As Stefan has noted, the time for settlements is probably over. This one runs to it's logical conclusion now.
 
John Wayne said:
I can't see City agreeing to any sort of settlement that involves a sporting sanction. I can't see the PL offering a settlement that doesn't include a sporting sanction. This will go all the way.
Click to expand...


When the white smoke appears over the tribunal door there should be a choreographed effort to legally sort out these sly underhand cunts who chased us and made a living off our situation.

 
As much as I hate talksport one thing I will give the credit for is they seem to be the only bit of media that has someone in our corner or at the very least speaks in facts
 
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