PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[fiddlesticksblue]

I thought they used an existing users password, if so what exactly is poor about the security procedures?
Other than user education on cyber security, fundamentally it's down to human ineptitude not lax security; you don't change everyone's passwords when one person leaves a company.

Edit: I do agree that we should have more than just password based access i.e. 2FA; but if an existing user's password was used the flaw is with that user

 

[ufo]

are we know doxxing City security staff? what the actual LOL

doxxing security staff?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It was a third party scouting system.

As far as we know, City contacted them and said X has left, disable his access.

But then X gets to liverpool, logs in and finds he still has access to his dashboard with the city content on.

Did City follow up with the firm and confirm his access was removed?
Did they send an email to the wrong company?

The worst bit was X later being promoted to a very senior job at LFC.

 

[ufo]

Hacking is thieving and anyone who disagrees is guilty af themselves

 

[ufo]

The worst bit was X later being promoted to a very senior job at LFC.

So the order came from higher ups ?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

So the order came from higher ups ?

We will never know. Apparently Klopp didn’t like him so he left with no explanation. But he is now back with FSG group in an even more senior role. Says a lot about the business ethics of that club.

 

[ufo]

We will never know. Apparently Klopp didn’t like him so he left with no explanation. But he is now back with FSG group in an even more senior role. Says a lot about the business ethics of that club.

I don’t think he acted on his own and don’t think he did it to get promoted.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

doxxing security staff?

Ahh it was ages ago in the thread, I had'nt refreshed the page. Nothing to see here.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Great post, validates exactly what I said about the anti City rhetoric outside of the UK, the Ajax fans we spoke to were great lads tbf, a lot younger than us but we had a good chat on the train to Amsterdam, they lived about an hour away but always go to the game or go into Amsterdam to watch their team in a bar.

Probably sound lads but have to say that’s glory hunting by at its finest.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It showed a big weakness in security. Misusing the scouting data, including that of very young players, is very serious. It would get you sacked in many organisations.

The perpetrators both got promoted, which tells you everything you need to know about FSG.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Hacking is thieving and anyone who disagrees is guilty af themselves

True but your off the wall posts are much better entertainment mate :)

 

[ufo]

True but your off the wall posts are much better entertainment mate :)

hahahha

 

[JPAMCR]

We’ve all done it!

It’s why there’s a minute’s delay between me hitting Send and the email being delivered!

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I can only assume the PL pressed us to settle quietly and we agreed. There is a PL rule Inthink that disputes must be settled between the parties without external involvement but I don't see how that applies to criminal offences. Perhaps, as someone said above, we naively believed it would help us in some way. Perhaps the quid pro quo was that the PL wouldn't take any action over our issues with UEFA over our initial FFP assessment.

Perhaps we even reported it to Merseyside Police! ;-)

One thing I’ve wondered since the PL belatedly taking up these charges seemingly on the same evidence, substantially, as with the UEFA case.
CAS basically gave a ruling that I would expect based on lack of evidence alone.

I get most of my accounting understanding and legal understanding in here from the likes of yourself and Stefan and a few others that you feel can be trusted objectively.

My question is, regarding the level of proof required, the onus of proof on the prosecution and the admittance of evidence from illegal sources etc.
There is no jury, so to speak, in this tribunal.
Is it being judged like a civil case? Balance of probabilities being sufficient proof or is it being tried like a criminal case, where the prosecution would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt and also full disclosure and admissibity of evidence is very important.

I’ve always had the uneasy feeling that if this was a criminal case, it would never reach court. The DPP here wouldn’t bring the case. The bar for proof of guilt would be too high.
The PL bringing the case has always felt like the prolonged process is doing the job it was intended to do.

I just want it ended soon one way or the other. Like others have mentioned in here. I’m actually getting sick of football and what it is becoming. It used to be a fair game played on a pitch, but it seems to be played off the park more and more. Some would say it always was, but this is becoming a circus.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It’s a slight aside, but to me, that makes the actions of those two individuals far more reprehensible. I think using someone’s login details is such a violation of that individual and exposes them to consequences in way that using another means to nefariously access the database does not.

I expect that individual felt very betrayed and understandably affronted by such a personal breach of trust.

To deploy a workplace analogy, stealing from your employer is one thing, but stealing from your fellow employees when they are at work is another, at least in my eyes.

Absolute fucking lowlife cunts.

They work for a low-life organisation. They're proven cheats.

One interesting story is that Henry owns the Boston Globe. The managing director is his wife, who has no journalistic experience. Her undergraduate degree is in business and she has a masters in real estate. I wonder who the second choice was for that role?

The Globe conducted a somewhat McCarthyite campaign against people alleged to be sex pests, but that didn't extend to one of the Globe's senior employees, who was accused of sexual harassment and resigned. They refused to name their own journalist.

 

[Centurions]

I can only assume the PL pressed us to settle quietly and we agreed. There is a PL rule Inthink that disputes must be settled between the parties without external involvement but I don't see how that applies to criminal offences. Perhaps, as someone said above, we naively believed it would help us in some way. Perhaps the quid pro quo was that the PL wouldn't take any action over our issues with UEFA over our initial FFP assessment.

Perhaps we even reported it to Merseyside Police! ;-)

Did we not get Fernandinho shortly after it came out? Perhaps they were warned off any of our targets at the time just to put it to bed.

 

[asahartford1]

One thing I’ve wondered since the PL belatedly taking up these charges seemingly on the same evidence, substantially, as with the UEFA case.
CAS basically gave a ruling that I would expect based on lack of evidence alone.

I get most of my accounting understanding and legal understanding in here from the likes of yourself and Stefan and a few others that you feel can be trusted objectively.

My question is, regarding the level of proof required, the onus of proof on the prosecution and the admittance of evidence from illegal sources etc.
There is no jury, so to speak, in this tribunal.
Is it being judged like a civil case? Balance of probabilities being sufficient proof or is it being tried like a criminal case, where the prosecution would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt and also full disclosure and admissibity of evidence is very important.

I’ve always had the uneasy feeling that if this was a criminal case, it would never reach court. The DPP here wouldn’t bring the case. The bar for proof of guilt would be too high.
The PL bringing the case has always felt like the prolonged process is doing the job it was intended to do.

I just want it ended soon one way or the other. Like others have mentioned in here. I’m actually getting sick of football and what it is becoming. It used to be a fair game played on a pitch, but it seems to be played off the park more and more. Some would say it always was, but this is becoming a circus.

It is probably much cleaner now than it ever was. Under the table payments , fraud , disappearing cash was much easier historically.
An old mate of mine transferred from the Rags to Derby got most of his pay illicitly.
The perception may be different, the media portrayal definitely paints a picture
but it's always been a tad murky.

 

[BrianW]

I remember being told, years ago, of a well-known local manager being given wads of cash in a brown bag in connection with some transfer. The game's always been a bit dodgy, and the people who pretend it is (or ever was) squeaky clean are either hypocrites or deluded.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

One thing I’ve wondered since the PL belatedly taking up these charges seemingly on the same evidence, substantially, as with the UEFA case.
CAS basically gave a ruling that I would expect based on lack of evidence alone.

I get most of my accounting understanding and legal understanding in here from the likes of yourself and Stefan and a few others that you feel can be trusted objectively.

My question is, regarding the level of proof required, the onus of proof on the prosecution and the admittance of evidence from illegal sources etc.
There is no jury, so to speak, in this tribunal.
Is it being judged like a civil case? Balance of probabilities being sufficient proof or is it being tried like a criminal case, where the prosecution would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt and also full disclosure and admissibity of evidence is very important.

I’ve always had the uneasy feeling that if this was a criminal case, it would never reach court. The DPP here wouldn’t bring the case. The bar for proof of guilt would be too high.
The PL bringing the case has always felt like the prolonged process is doing the job it was intended to do.

I just want it ended soon one way or the other. Like others have mentioned in here. I’m actually getting sick of football and what it is becoming. It used to be a fair game played on a pitch, but it seems to be played off the park more and more. Some would say it always was, but this is becoming a circus.

It's a civil case so the test is balance of probabilities. I think we argued at CAS that the bar should be set higher given the seriousness of the allegations but that argument was dismissed and the case was decided on balance of probabilities. However UEFA's evidence couldn't even meet that bar.

We don't know what evidence the PL has of course but it's tempting to take the view that the CPS might feel that this was a case where a police force, or individual, was rather too keen to try to get a prosecution against an individual they had a grudge against.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

It's a civil case so the tesy is balance of probabilities. I think we argued at CAS that the bar should be set higher given the seriousness of the allegations but that argument was dismissed and the case was decided on balance of probabilities. However UEFA's evidence couldn't even meet that bar.

We don't know what evidence the PL has of course but it's tempting to take the view that the CPS might feel that this was a case where a police force, or individual, was rather too keen to try to get a prosecution against an individual they had a grudge against.

That’s something I should have known, but didn’t about CAS.
That’s even worse when you consider it, if all they have is the same lack of evidence.
If the cabal win this, I really do feel I’m done with football.
We have to win.