PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

oldius said:
I chatted with a Liverpool fan today. He said that he had been chatting to a Manchester United fan, who claimed that City's players already know that the club has been found guilty and that is the reason for the poor form. He asked me if I'd heard that. I told him that it was complete and utter bollocks. When Liverpool and United fans have a discussion, shite spreads.
Click to expand...
i stumbled across that fat pick howson ( might aswell be ......) talking the same shite and the sheep were lapping it up
 
Keith Moon said:
Of course, but it cannot be ruled out that there are documents related to City among the 14TB that didn’t go to DS, especially since both the hacker and his lawyer claim that this is the case.
Click to expand...

If this extra data didn't go to DS, where do you think it went? I assume you think the French authorities for use in their investigations of potential criminal activity under their jurisdiction, via the Portuguese authorities. Why would those authorities, or even the British authorities for that matter if they were interested, provide a party to a private civil dispute in the UK with illegally obtained data? What you are saying doesn't make sense.

Pinto's data only caused the UEFA/PL nonsense because of what was leaked in the press. There is absolutely no chance the authorities would provide additional information to the PL. And, as we have already discussed, Pinto was in no position himself to do it after his arrest in 2019.

I think you need to give this up.
 
oldius said:
I chatted with a Liverpool fan today. He said that he had been chatting to a Manchester United fan, who claimed that City's players already know that the club has been found guilty and that is the reason for the poor form. He asked me if I'd heard that. I told him that it was complete and utter bollocks. When Liverpool and United fans have a discussion, shite spreads.
Click to expand...
If the players know, the agents know.
If the agents know, the press know.
If the press know, we all know.

We don't know.
 
Keith Moon said:
If the Premier League has new evidence proving that our witnesses lied at CAS, we’re in deep water.
Click to expand...

Seriously, the PL wont have any proof that the club's witnesses lied to CAS any more than they have proof of the serious fraud allegations.

What they may have is circumstantial evidence suggesting it, but as with everything else they will have to prove it to a standard much higher than the club's counter evidence. It has been discussed on here before many times why it is possible witnesses lied at CAS, but very unlikely and very difficult to prove even if it was true.

You may just as well come out and say if the PL has proof the club filed accounts fraudulently because Mansour funded the sponsorships then the club is fucked. Because that is also possible but it is also very unlikely and very difficult to prove even if it was true.

I really don't know why you are doing this to yourself.
 
BerkshireBlue said:
This is why the PL will fail. Their solicitors have clearly fucked up and haven't realised the rules back in the day were different to the ones around today. Fordham - nothing wrong at the time, Mancini - nothing wrong at the time, Etihad and any sponsorship deal - CAS trumps any IC verdict. So what does that leave them with?
Click to expand...
Hope you're right mate,but if that's the case why would it take 12 weeks?
 
halfcenturyup said:
Seriously, the PL wont have any proof that the club's witnesses lied to CAS any more than they have proof of the serious fraud allegations.

What they may have is circumstantial evidence suggesting it, but as with everything else they will have to prove it to a standard much higher than the club's counter evidence. It has been discussed on here before many times why it is possible witnesses lied at CAS, but very unlikely and very difficult to prove even if it was true.

You may just as well come out and say if the PL has proof the club filed accounts fraudulently because Mansour funded the sponsorships then the club is fucked. Because that is also possible but it is also very unlikely and very difficult to prove even if it was true.

I really don't know why you are doing this to yourself.
Click to expand...
Do you know what we are accused of or if there is any new evidence regarding the 54 charges of Misrepresentation of Financial Information?

Do you know if the Premier League has new evidence that they either uncovered themselves or obtained from FootyLeaks, Pinto, or the EIC?

Do you know if we actually funded the sponsorships?
 
CC1 said:
The Keith moon guy just never gives up with his (all “in his opinion” ) negativity. He seems determined to keep his theme in the spotlight & won’t acknowledge it’s all his supposition without any backup. It’s all “there might be” new evidence. But he won’t accept that the hacks weren’t aimed at City - we were a small part of the big picture.
Also - you are now giving it out that we’ll get done for non cooperation & will get a fine. But once again ITS ALL IN YOUR HEAD & JUST YOUR OPINION.
It’s posts like these that cause the fans to have a go at each other & if you want it to stop then give up posting things that are just supposition
Click to expand...
Correct it’s just my opinion. That’s all anyone has because no one knows anything about the outcome of the case - including you and me. But your post just proved my point - no need whatsoever to take that over the top tone over a post that was just trying to explain why people do and say the things they do (which incidentally is something I know allot about with my line of work) and that Mr Moon probably is a decent City fan who’s just worried (probably needlessly) about the outcome. Anyway, merry Xmas :)
 
wattle said:
Correct it’s just my opinion. That’s all anyone has because no one knows anything about the outcome of the case - including you and me. But your post just proved my point - no need whatsoever to take that over the top tone over a post that was just trying to explain why people do and say the things they do (which incidentally is something I know allot about with my line of work) and that Mr Moon probably is a decent City fan who’s just worried (probably needlessly) about the outcome. Anyway, merry Xmas :)
Click to expand...

But I don’t agree that you do know why people respond to these posts. Is that ok?

Happy New Year
 
Keith Moon said:
No, I do understand how the disclosure process works, but I’m concerned about what may have come in from the sidelines and helped the Premier League piece things together.

Of course, I also understand that new documents are irrelevant at this stage, but the last times new documents were mentioned by Pinto or his lawyer were in November 2023, February 2024, and June 2024.

They’ve had three years since CAS to uncover new evidence, and while it’s likely that the EIC got the juiciest stuff the first time around, it can’t be ruled out that there was more. DS/EIC received 3.4 terabytes out of the 17.5 terabytes.
Click to expand...
If you understand it, if the PL has had documents from the hack (I doubt they have and probably had some concern about taking the docs from such a source) it is then obliged to share the documents with City and put its case. This will have happened well before the hearing. So, it’s all so what now. I am quite sure that if the evidence exists for the allegations to be proven, they simply don’t need any further help from Pinto. Either way, if you understand disclosure, Pinto is now irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Roachy said:
A question for some of our more learned posters to answer if possible. When the outcome of the decision arrives, will there be some disclosure of the material that led to the allegations and our subsequent counter evidence? Obviously confidentiality issues will come into play, but as a layman my knowledge of the process is virtually non existent.
Click to expand...
Yes there is likely to be fairly specific coverage of key documents in the judgment
 
Keith Moon said:
Do you know what we are accused of or if there is any new evidence regarding the 54 charges of Misrepresentation of Financial Information?

Do you know if the Premier League has new evidence that they either uncovered themselves or obtained from FootyLeaks, Pinto, or the EIC?

Do you know if we actually funded the sponsorships?
Click to expand...

Of course they have more evidence than UEFA had. UEFA had six or seven leaked emails that spanned four years out of the ten years the PL has looked at. The PL has also been reviewing the club's records (accounting, communication and otherwise, much more than UEFA had access to and much more, for that matter, than Pinto had access to) for more than four years. No-one in their right mind will tell you they don't have more evidence. But that isn't the point.

And once again, the PL wont have proof that Mansour funded any sponsorships. They will have circumstantial evidence which the panel will weigh against the club's counter evidence. It's possible Mansour did what is alleged, but it is very unlikely and very difficult to prove to the standard required even if he did.

None of that has anything at all to do with Pinto.
 
Keith Moon said:
Do you know what we are accused of or if there is any new evidence regarding the 54 charges of Misrepresentation of Financial Information?

Do you know if the Premier League has new evidence that they either uncovered themselves or obtained from FootyLeaks, Pinto, or the EIC?

Do you know if we actually funded the sponsorships?
Click to expand...
Stop being such an attention-seeking idiot. You clearly know fuck all about this issue and refuse to listen to those who do know something. But just to try to hammer some facts into your skull, I'll respond.

The evidence presented at CAS from several sources made it clear where the bulk of the Etihad sponsorship came from. It came from central Abu Dhabi marketing funds and there's nothing wrong with that. UEFA could offer no cogent evidence, other than the very selective and out-of-context hacked emails, to the contrary.

Etihad were given the money, but not by Sheikh Mansour. They paid it to us, the accounting was correct and they got full consideration for the money they paid in terms of sponsorship, plus it was considered to be a fair price for what they got.

But if you want further proof, then the Open Skies case against Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways provides it. There's a document on file in the New York Court, which was there well before the Der Spiegel stuff came out, which states that the Etihad sponsorship of City was funded by central Abu Dhabi funds. That was prepared around 2010 I think, certainly no late than 2012 and that document is why I was so confident that we'd succeed in our appeal to CAS.

Do you seriously think that a document was prepared in 2012 that anticipated having to cover up something that we had no idea would become an issue years later?
 
Last edited:
BerkshireBlue said:
This is why the PL will fail. Their solicitors have clearly fucked up and haven't realised the rules back in the day were different to the ones around today. Fordham - nothing wrong at the time, Mancini - nothing wrong at the time, Etihad and any sponsorship deal - CAS trumps any IC verdict. So what does that leave them with?
Click to expand...
They are well aware of any weaknesses in their case. Obviously they realise what the rules said in the relevant years - they aren’t morons.

But they will also believe they have a chance of overcoming weaknesses. Someone loses in every case despite believing they won’t.
 
oldius said:
I chatted with a Liverpool fan today. He said that he had been chatting to a Manchester United fan, who claimed that City's players already know that the club has been found guilty and that is the reason for the poor form. He asked me if I'd heard that. I told him that it was complete and utter bollocks. When Liverpool and United fans have a discussion, shite spreads.
Click to expand...
As soon as the players hear anything it gets straight out into the press. That’s the nature of a “secret”. A clever solicitor once said to me “if one person knows you can assume everyone knows” because everyone tells their best friend and it’s out like wildfire.
 
oldius said:
I chatted with a Liverpool fan today. He said that he had been chatting to a Manchester United fan, who claimed that City's players already know that the club has been found guilty and that is the reason for the poor form. He asked me if I'd heard that. I told him that it was complete and utter bollocks. When Liverpool and United fans have a discussion, shite spreads.
Click to expand...
The trouble is, even some of our own fans are buying into that one. The other conspiracy theory that some dickhead Liverpool and United fans are coming out with is that City are deliberately having a shit season in order to get a lesser punishment!
 
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