PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Be interesting to see what would happen if a club delivered certain terms as a precursor to the sponsorship being approved then, mid-contract, the sponsor refused to provide the requested data.

However I've used the example before of Aguero's transfer in 2012, where Atletico Madrid factored the future instalments in favour of an upfront discounted payment.

That payment came from an opaque offshore trust and they wouldn't register the transfer unless they knew the beneficial owner of that trust. Eventually, after some legal to-and-fro they were given enough information to satisfy them and register the transfer. That's more to do with Anti-Money Laundering regulations, so they had a mandatory requirement to make those enquiries.

It would be interesting to see the PL's requirement for clubs to do what you've said tested in court or by an independent panel.
Ken Bates specialised in anonymous off shore trusts both at Chelsea and Leeds. He sold Elland Road to such a trust.
 
I'll second what you said.

It's a joke that utd get preferential treatment and get away with stuff and not the fa or the Premier League bats an eyelid or the media don't splash it everywhere like they do with us.

We made the headlines through a fine for being late out for numerous second halves.

The red mardarses story of their "minor" fine, which incidentally was six figures, got buried immediately after every outlet softly softly told us all.

It fuckin stinks, it's as clear as the nose on your face how they treated with kid gloves and Khaldoon has said he's not having any more nonsense and hence we won't be taking a pinch or a fine for nobody.
Never heard much about the fine they didn't incur the time zebra pants and his mates had their game postponed by storming old toilet either!!
 
Sorry I don't know the answer.

It was @ slbsn who suggested that it would show in the accounts, maybe in ours, PL's accounts ?

I was asking about the amount that the PL have spent prosecuting the charges against City, the cost of which will fall to all PL members.

It is of more interest to the non yank owned club I suspect and the other cunts can get fucked as far as I am concerned, cabal members and compliant US owned cunts too.

And any pathetic owners who voted sheep-like with the cabal.
We will see a big spike in operating costs in the accounts and suspect one of the clubs will leak the actual amount from management accounts.
 
We will see a big spike in operating costs in the accounts and suspect one of the clubs will leak the actual amount from management accounts.
if every club in the premier league contributes money to the running of it, is there a sliding scale?
i mean, do the clubs who earn more contribute more,
or is it divvied up equally between the 20clubs?

i think the point i'm trying to make is...
how much (what percentage) of the money that the premier league have spunked on the case against us was actually paid for by us?
if you see what i mean.
 
When the verdict comes in I wonder what else the cartel and their eager half-witted enablers will try to throw at us?
If we are cleared which a good majority of us think we will be,it’ll be interesting to see what else they come up with,until we are no longer a threat or contending for trophies it won’t stop in my opinion..But I’d love for the club to now go on the front foot and give these fuckers a taste of their own medicine..
 
No, it's an internal disciplinary process, same as if somebody was hauled up before the Association of Small Claims Lawyer's disciplinary panel, that isn't an arbitration unless the small lawyer concerned and the Association had agreed it should be.

There must be some procedural rules, but they dont come from the Arbitration Act!
Ah yes, the ASCLDP. Been in front of them a few times.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top