PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

To all the naysayers who think we must be guilty of something, I say consider this:

Does our owner act like fat crook/ pension robber/ sex pest/ all round ****, robert Maxwell, and his fraud, which also involved Oxford utd? What about his despicable daughter ghislaine and his crooked parasitic sons?

Do the managers that Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon have/had the cavalier and reckless attitude that Harry rednapp and Pompey's owners had to Portsmouth? How many years have Pompey spent recovering from these twats excesses?

We had our own pubic haired, Cuban heeled dictator in charge for over 20 years and how low did we drop, what state were we in when wardle, Bernstein rescued us?

I didn't and don't objectively know much about our erstwhile Thai guy, who I always think of as Dr Snakeskin, but at least we got ADUG in charge and have never looked back.

Respectfully I would ask what is it about "outsiders" like Khaldoon and even Soriano and Twixi, off hand comments about nicknaming the "the terrorists". Top bantz if you're musk or trump or badenoch or jenriyk. Not a savoury bunch.

Have a look around our city and see what the owner's done with rundown derelict land, making a world class sports campus, redevelopment of the stadium, paying rent so that the council will always get income, numerous housing developments, infrastructure, it's not terrible is it?

Accounting irregularities from before FFP? The only way it makes sense to charge us is if it's at the instigation of the cabal of clubs who would like to carve up English football for entirely their own benefit, aided and abetted by a governance structure that has it's CEO picked for it by said cabal!

We've always been bought up as believing in the law and due process, one of the oldest legal principles being the assumption of innocence until proven guilty. Not for MCFC, but let's hope this house of cards is exposed as corrupt and solely run for the entitled and dishonest.

Hopefully Twixi will get some more bangers in to bolster the squad as Lord Pannick leads the blue haired team of lawyers to a climactic victory!
 
Last edited:
For some strange reason this popped into my algorithm:
www.chroniclelive.co.uk

Man City told Premier League 'cannot relegate' them in new charges bombshell

Newcastle United will be keeping a close eye on proceedings
www.chroniclelive.co.uk

Absolute local media click bait. It mentions finance expert to give it an air of itk saying that city will be deducted 60 points if they are found guilty.

The world outside of our club seem remarkably ill-informed and just spout wishful thinking, nothing about evidence, burden of proof or possible proportional punitive action. I was talking to a dipper last year and it was all 115, fast forward 12 months apparently it is now 130, that is the both the sum of his knowledge and incremental increase. I told him that I don’t think anything will come off it, he didn’t like that, he questioned why I thought that, I replied “where’s the evidence?”. I like to think that was a lightbulb moment but I doubt it.
 
halfcenturyup said:
It's a very serious and complex set of allegations that is very difficult to dumb down to a Scholes /Carragher level, tbf. He told them what they wanted to hear and if he didn't they would edit the soundbites to make it sound like he did.

Too many second-rate analysts trying too hard to make a career for themselves on the back of all this. It does my head in and, I'll say it again, the best analysis of the situation anyone will find anywhere is on here. I would strongly recommend anyone not to put themselves through the rest of the drivel. There is nothing of value there.

And when anything does happen or in the unlikely event anyone says anything relevant, the best analysis of it will be on here anyway.
Click to expand...
I dont think they do the idiots guide to financial allegations
 
Gone for a Burton said:
Can you explain what difference it would've made and why please ?
Click to expand...
When we became City fans, our owners could not be criticised for Human rights violations. When Mansour bought the club it would have been hard to leave on those grounds due to years of loyalty in contrast to those who joined us after the take over.
 
Last edited:
Why is everyone flapping over that failed business man Jordan?Guy gets schooled by Stefan when he goes on and also Eddie Hearn. He thinks he is a boxing expert when in fact he is just a know fuck all.
My take is this. Khaldoon said 'irrefutable evidence' so that is fine with me. If we get relegated then who isn't up for a season in league 1 or the championship??? Board will have to resign.
I'd love to win the c.league and then they twirl us.
If there had been any leak it would be in the public domain by now. Do you not think players, agents would not be aware?? They leak like a dripping tap. Relax and enjoy. Charges not substantiated then we all know we are guilty by association anyway. Embrace it. 55k plus in league 1 or league 2 will be immemse. Even more records broken.
Oh as for Levy, lolllllll that clowns club will never ever win anything. Fucking Spursy. Lol.

One final point. Why havent the serious fraud office ever investigated us? Fraudluent accounting apparently so why not?? Yes I know it is civil but I am so not worried.
 
St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:
Why is everyone flapping over that failed business man Jordan?Guy gets schooled by Stefan when he goes on and also Eddie Hearn. He thinks he is a boxing expert when in fact he is just a know fuck all.
My take is this. Khaldoon said 'irrefutable evidence' so that is fine with me. If we get relegated then who isn't up for a season in league 1 or the championship??? Board will have to resign.
I'd love to win the c.league and then they twirl us.
If there had been any leak it would be in the public domain by now. Do you not think players, agents would not be aware?? They leak like a dripping tap. Relax and enjoy. Charges not substantiated then we all know we are guilty by association anyway. Embrace it. 55k plus in league 1 or league 2 will be immemse. Even more records broken.
Oh as for Levy, lolllllll that clowns club will never ever win anything. Fucking Spursy. Lol.

One final point. Why havent the serious fraud office ever investigated us? Fraudluent accounting apparently so why not?? Yes I know it is civil but I am so not worried.
Click to expand...
‘Not substantiated’ or ‘unsubstantiated’ are words I think we will see a lot.
There is a thinly veiled implication of guilt present but not quite provable contained in both.
I suspect these words will be used much more than the ‘no evidence’ preferred by CAS.
 
Cityfan1977 said:
I dont understand why no journalist has not gone close to ask this question what happenes if City win ? They must know that it is hard for PL to proof this case , but everyone seem so sure that City are guilty .
Click to expand...
If they can help the PL to show black is actually white why would they be even hinting that City may be not guilty?
As others have posted this is a headline they would like to keep indefinately.
 
Last edited:
Kinkys Left Foot said:
No change in my camp.

We know nothing with any certainty, I fall back on do I believe the clubs leadership when they say they have done nothing wrong and they have irrefutable evidence to prove it.

There was no "evidence" to prove practically the same serious charges at CAS.

IMO the scandal is in fact UEFA circumvented its own rules to impose a ban for which there was no evidence (12 times) to sufficiently support their charges.

There is no "evidence" in the public domain to suggest otherwise. Have the PL acquired more documents, yes, but nobody knows what they are or if they prove City did anything wrong with respect to any of the charges, let alone the more serious allegations of fraud, to the necessary standard.

So now we learn from the APT case that the PL's rules in some aspects are unlawful and unfair, also have treated us like pariahs, have been disgraceful in the dealings with our sponsorships and been disingenuous and deliberately instigated delays in at least two cases.

Read their interpretation of the findings - Premier League Statement

Contrast this to the actual findings where their behaviour in dealing with us is outlined:

The APT Decisions​

As set out above, the APT Rules dictate that the PL must make a final decision as to all APT applications within a specific timeframe. City claimed that the PL had exceeded this limit in respect of the APT Decisions. The Tribunal decided that, in two of these instances, the PL had exceeded the time limit due to a lack of resources within their regulatory team, whilst the PL accepted that it had created a delay in the third instance.

The Tribunal decided that there was no evidence that City had been unable to make any APT transaction because of these delays, and that no potential sponsorships were compromised by them. However, the Tribunal also found that the PL had created an "unreasonable delay" in respect of the FAB APT (by three months) and the EP APT (by two months). City may seek damages because of these delays, although given the findings of the Tribunal, the loss suffered is not immediately apparent. It is noteworthy that the PL here was found to have broken the APT Rules rather than the rules themselves being found to be deficient, and that the Board subsequently revised its decision in respect of the EP APT following representations made by City.

The Tribunal also found that the Board's decisions relating to the EAG APT and the FAB APT should be set aside on the grounds of procedural unfairness. In relation to the EAG APT, the Tribunal found that procedural unfairness arose because the Board did not give City an opportunity to respond to the FMV benchmarking analysis before reaching its decision. Regarding the FAB APT, the Tribunal ruled that, prior to the Board's final determination, it did not give City access to the Databank transactions completed by other clubs to which the Board referred in its final determination.


The outfall of this is the current regulator the PL have been found to have treated us with utter disdain and with deliberate intent to use procedures unfairly. I believe this is utterly contemptible on their part, yet the media in this country have shovelled that part of the decision under the carpet.

I sincerely hope Lord Pannick was able to point this out to the Independent Commission members in charge of the 115 case. Whilst having no evidential effect it certainly portrays a "mindset" of the regulator in respect of legal matters with MCFC.

Now we await the IC's decision on the PL's rushed resolution to the APT deficiencies voted in by the usual suspects. Lets hope for another positive outcome for City.

So, do I believe our owners and executives, sponsors, auditors, accountants and other third parties have acted fraudulently, dishonestly, conspiratorially and knowingly submitted false accounts for a period of 10 years or more? Do I believe Simon Pierce and others including Etihad senior executives lied under oath at CAS? Do I believe those same individuals submitted false evidence in support of their statements and witness testimony?

No i do not! What's more if you can take that leap of faith you must therefore believe that there will be no smoking gun evidence to prove that they did any of those things.

I honestly believe that if City had been guilty of any of those major charges there would have been a settlement before litigation. It makes no sense to me to argue a case for which there would be clear evidence to substantiate the accusations.

However as anyone who knows anything about either criminal or civil court procedure and the legal system knows, entities can be found to have done things they did not on the balance of probabilities if they are unable to submit sufficient rebuttal evidence to that of their accusers or in the case of perverse findings by the judge, judges, panel or Commission. There are of course procedural appeal remedies in some cases of but findings of fact interpreted by the Commission would be difficult to overcome unless it was clearly perverse. These are the perils of litigation.

Let's all hope Lord Pannick and his team have presented our irrefutable evidence sufficiently well to be successful in repudiating the PL's accusations of financial impropriety, malfeasance, obfuscation and obstruction.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%, but why would PL/Red Cartel agree to settle before litigation if they were confident they would win and wanted to screw us over?
 
Last edited:
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
How noble and fair minded of you. You'd be really disappointed if the club was "genuinely" guilty and you'd not be able to support the club any longer "if we won .... while not playing by the rules" Especially as we'd be "tearing into" United if they'd won in the same way. Well, my fair weather friend, that's exactly how they did win. They were fined £5000 - only £5000 - for making off the book payments, but they were never called "cheaters" and Busby was later knighted "for services to football"! Some 20 years later the club found it necessary to resort to an abrasive Glaswegian to try and knock Liverpool off their "******* perch" and, of course, he set about his task by spending unprecedented (before or since) sums of the club's owners' money. This continued for 20 years, until Abramovitch and then Sheikh Mansour appeared on the scene with a spending power that dwarfed that available to the red knight. Only then did the rags consider that rules might be necessary to protect small clubs (those small clubs United had helped cheat out of any share of gate receipts at away matches) from having to compete with Chelsea and City. So, the great spendthrifts of the PL proposed "fair rules" which allowed them to spend more than anyone else, introduced no measures to make the rags deal with their huge (and growing) debt and did their utmost to inaugurate a world for rags to thrive in.

So, if your lillywhite conscience can stand the stress, wait for the award and if it goes against us you can then decide to ditch our club and go elsewhere, but I don't think you'll be missed at the Etihad.
Click to expand...
One of the finest posts ever, well done
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
How noble and fair minded of you. You'd be really disappointed if the club was "genuinely" guilty and you'd not be able to support the club any longer "if we won .... while not playing by the rules" Especially as we'd be "tearing into" United if they'd won in the same way. Well, my fair weather friend, that's exactly how they did win. They were fined £5000 - only £5000 - for making off the book payments, but they were never called "cheaters" and Busby was later knighted "for services to football"! Some 20 years later the club found it necessary to resort to an abrasive Glaswegian to try and knock Liverpool off their "******* perch" and, of course, he set about his task by spending unprecedented (before or since) sums of the club's owners' money. This continued for 20 years, until Abramovitch and then Sheikh Mansour appeared on the scene with a spending power that dwarfed that available to the red knight. Only then did the rags consider that rules might be necessary to protect small clubs (those small clubs United had helped cheat out of any share of gate receipts at away matches) from having to compete with Chelsea and City. So, the great spendthrifts of the PL proposed "fair rules" which allowed them to spend more than anyone else, introduced no measures to make the rags deal with their huge (and growing) debt and did their utmost to inaugurate a world for rags to thrive in.

So, if your lillywhite conscience can stand the stress, wait for the award and if it goes against us you can then decide to ditch our club and go elsewhere, but I don't think you'll be missed at the Etihad.
Click to expand...
Fergusson ‘abrasive’? Surely not!!
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
Not disputed but it is a sad indictment regarding the total lack of integrity demonstrated by these supposedly impartial commentators.
Click to expand...

Saw a clip of The Overlap on Instagram discussing how City can't be thrown out the Prem, and Scholes doesn't allow so much as a split second before asking if the Prem can deduct enough points to relegate them.

At this point any Not Guilty verdict is going to be written off as a fix. Because City and the Premier League are clearly in cahoots in Man City's ongoing feud vs...um...the Premier League.
 
jamielowndes said:
Saw a clip of The Overlap on Instagram discussing how City can't be thrown out the Prem, and Scholes doesn't allow so much as a split second before asking if the Prem can deduct enough points to relegate them.

At this point any Not Guilty verdict is going to be written off as a fix. Because City and the Premier League are clearly in cahoots in Man City's ongoing feud vs...um...the Premier League.
Click to expand...

When I mentioned integrity, Scholes never ever came to mind believe it or not ?

Toe sucking and female family members would appear to be at the forefront of his level of interest.
 
Cityfan1977 said:
I dont understand why no journalist has not gone close to ask this question what happenes if City win ? They must know that it is hard for PL to proof this case , but everyone seem so sure that City are guilty .
Click to expand...
My take - if pl really wants to follow the money trail , koolhand has everything in his power to lead them to never ending rabbit hole or like a dog chasing it’s own tail .
 
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