PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Do you ever say anything positive?
Seriously beginning to see you as a wum mate.

Only time will tell but I fear that his last paragraph might already be happening.

We prefer to believe that we used the 115 charges as motivation for the treble, but in reality our subsequent transfer windows have been relatively poor.

Our PR should have been far more robust but instead we've allowed the media to encourage this assumption of guilt.
How do we know that this isn't a major reason for players not wanting to join?

 

[halfcenturyup]

@petrusha said: “Nonetheless, the essential dichotomy that I discussed at the outset still remains. City's confidence about having irrefutable evidence and the entirely reasonable assumption that the PL wouldn't have accused the club in this way without being confident of having a strong case are mutually exclusive. Something doesn't add up.”
The only way I can see to square this circle is if the redshirts pushed the PL to a point where the league could no longer resist and this was the only way to get them off their backs. We know, for example that the redshirts kept up a non stop barrage of letters emails and phone calls on this subject (Martin Samuel).
The other explanation doesn’t bear thinking about.

That is a circle that takes some squaring, but I am not that surprised the PL ended their investigation with a list of unanswered allegations (I have done that myself many times: this is as far as we can go, this is the list of unanswered issues and possible breaches, do we proceed?). What surprises me more is that they went to the disciplinary process with all the allegations.

Let me explain.

Their investigation reached the point where they had gone as far as they could with the accounting records and supporting documentation available at the club. They needed external information to conclude on each of the matters but the club refused access, or claimed that the third parties refused access. I have previously given my thoughts on why the club would take that approach.

So the PL had to either drop the case for a lack of evidence or proceed with the allegations in the disciplinary process. This would be a wholly unsatisfactory position for the PL because they knew evidence was provided to CAS that they didn't have access to. Evidence that would have clarified some of the issues. So what could they do? Dropping the case would set a terrible precedent on cooperation. Continuing the case would likely lead to defeat when the counter-evidence was presented. In the end, though, I am not surprised they decided to refer the club to the disciplinary process.

But the question of what gets referred is where pressure from the cartel comes in. The investigation may have had 115 unanswered issues but, basically, there is one, single issue that could have been referred, two including non-cooperation. There was no need to refer to all 115 as separate allegations because almost all are either immaterial or consequential to the main allegation. In whose interest is it to have as much coverage given to all the allegations? And who is too weak to stand up against it?

Anyway, just my thoughts :)

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

Not sure how it can be like the APT case.

The core PL argument is that the club fraudulently manipulated its accounts to such an extent that the auditors were deceived and the club gained a sporting advantage. The detailed allegations depend to a great extent on whether they can prove that. If they can't, most of the 115 fall away.

I think one or other of the parties will be a big "winner". Most likely City, imho.

Balance of probabilities isn’t it. Dont have to prove it I don’t think. I may be wrong.

 

[tommy116]

Win or lose we already lost . The damage to our reputation is written and no exoneration will re write it.
We now see on the pitch the reality of what this organised attempt to destroy our club in real time.

Come on, a month ago City were on track to break the unbeaten record and everything was going OK, it's a bad run, every team goes through it. What's different is that off the field City have the right people in charge to fix it and the fans in the stands who understand what has to be done, now demos or boos here, it will come good.

 

[SilverFox2]

That is a circle that takes some squaring, but I am not that surprised the PL ended their investigation with a list of unanswered allegations (I have done that myself many times: this is as far as we can go, this is the list of unanswered issues and possible breaches, do we proceed?). What surprises me more is that they went to the disciplinary process with all the allegations.

Let me explain.

Their investigation reached the point where they had gone as far as they could with the accounting records and supporting documentation available at the club. They needed external information to conclude on each of the matters but the club refused access, or claimed that the third parties refused access. I have previously given my thoughts on why the club would take that approach.

So the PL had to either drop the case for a lack of evidence or proceed with the allegations in the disciplinary process. This would be a wholly unsatisfactory position for the PL because they knew evidence was provided to CAS that they didn't have access to. Evidence that would have clarified some of the issues. So what could they do? Dropping the case would set a terrible precedent on cooperation. Continuing the case would likely lead to defeat when the counter-evidence was presented. In the end, though, I am not surprised they decided to refer the club to the disciplinary process.

But the question of what gets referred is where pressure from the cartel comes in. The investigation may have had 115 unanswered issues but, basically, there is one, single issue that could have been referred, two including non-cooperation. There was no need to refer to all 115 as separate allegations because almost all are either immaterial or consequential to the main allegation. In whose interest is it to have as much coverage given to all the allegations? And who is too weak to stand up against it?

Anyway, just my thoughts :)

Do you think it was a deliberate attempt to tie up our legal team with individual yet similar cases or was it simply the only way to appease a red cartel pressure?

 

[manimanc]

Have you seen their name? Sounds very American to me.

Never a city fan this geezer.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Balance of probabilities isn’t it. Dont have to prove it I don’t think. I may be wrong.

Yes. The standard of proof is balance of probabilities. But they still have to prove it to that standard.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Do you think it was a deliberate attempt to tie up our legal team with individual yet similar cases or was it simply the only way to appease a red cartel pressure?

I think it was more likely a strategy from the club: you want to make these allegations, you do it with the absolute minimum required help from us and see you in "court".

Just my view. May be bollocks.

 

[SilverFox2]

I think it was more likely a strategy from the club: you want to make these allegations, you do it with the absolute minimum required help from us and see you in "court".

Just my view. May be bollocks.

Good point, never thought of it that way.

 

[freshie]

 

[John Wayne]

I think it was more likely a strategy from the club: you want to make these allegations, you do it with the absolute minimum required help from us and see you in "court".

Just my view. May be bollocks.

I don't think it's bollocks at all. This is what happened when we went to CAS. We accused the UEFA CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber of an abuse of process and went to CAS to air our displeasure when details of the case were being leaked. Our non-cooperation fine at the end of CAS was precisely because we felt the UEFA process was compromised. We chose not to respect the process and adopted a 'see you in court' attitude back then. It would be conceivable that we have done the same now if we believe that the PL have acted in bad faith.

 

[Keeper!]

View attachment 139118

If the verdict takes a long time would it not suggest that our "irrefutable evidence" may not be irrefutable?

 

[mexico1970]

If the verdict takes a long time would it not suggest that our "irrefutable evidence" may not be irrefutable?

I'm more of a mind to think (Could be completely way off the mark here but with no information to go on) that the PL if found to be a devious sack of lying bastards and they get thrown out of the hearing with nothing, our club will try their best not to make them out to be the bad guys and allow them time to concoct a story that saves them some face.

 

[Keeper!]

I'm more of a mind to think (Could be completely way off the mark here but with no information to go on) that the PL if found to be a devious sack of lying bastards and they get thrown out of the hearing with nothing, our club will try their best not to make them out to be the bad guys and allow them time to concoct a story that saves them some face.

I would be utterly amazed if that was the case, I get the feeling the Khaldoon wants and will get blood if he is correct on the irrefutable evidence.

All our legal costs at the very least would have to be met by the PL.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

https://archive.is/20241127151158/https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/manchester-city-115-financial-charges-beyond-end-season-8qds5d0nk

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I'm more of a mind to think (Could be completely way off the mark here but with no information to go on) that the PL if found to be a devious sack of lying bastards and they get thrown out of the hearing with nothing, our club will try their best not to make them out to be the bad guys and allow them time to concoct a story that saves them some face.

Even if miles off the reality of the fact, I seriously hope you are right :)

 

[mexico1970]

I would be utterly amazed if that was the case, I get the feeling the Khaldoon wants and will get blood if he is correct on the irrefutable evidence.

All our legal costs at the very least would have to be met by the PL.

I honestly believe that if we had been more public we'd have scared the PL and of course the media off mate, we serve sandwiches and sweet treats to journalists that annihilate us in print.

 

[halfcenturyup]

If the verdict takes a long time would it not suggest that our "irrefutable evidence" may not be irrefutable?

Still too much we don't know.

The story is that the hearing is paused until mid-December when the final summations will be heard. When it was paused and why we don't know.

The rumours that it was finished at the beginning of the month may just have been about it having been paused following the two parties presenting their evidence. If that was the case, it ended quickly?

Basically, no-one knows anything :)

 

[Keeper!]

I honestly believe that if we had been more public we'd have scared the PL and of course the media off mate, we serve sandwiches and sweet treats to journalists that annihilate us in print.

100% agree there, we are a very soft touch, hopefully it's not because we have something to hide.

 

[mexico1970]

100% agree there, we are a very soft touch, hopefully it's not because we have something to hide.

If we'd have turned the coach around after the vermin bricked and bottled it, if we would have forced the issue when that young girl got injured with a cup full of coins, if we would have hammered Klipperty and Liverpool for the "Bad day for football" comment we wouldn't be here or at least they would know we don't take any shit.

There was nothing good about Pep joining in the Klopp wankfest when he left to join Red Bull either, should have said what he meant and if he DID mean what he said then the world's fucked :)