PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

homerdog said:
I wonder when the Premier League will be announcing their investigation?

I won't hold my breath...
Click to expand...

Mike S said:
My thoughts too when I saw the news this morning. Basically CFC bankrolled by tax evasion schemes, which let’s face it doesn’t surprise me but should (but it probably won’t) trigger some kind of investigation from the EPL.
Click to expand...
There doesn't need to be an investigation as Roman dodged the tax in his own name and Chelsea benefitted from some of his saved money going to them. - Parallels with another tax-dodging **** buying a share of a football club means the authorities will be happy with it.
 
petrusha said:
Jesus Christ! Where even to start with this heap of shit? I've just looked up Professor Rob Wilson's own description of his career on his university's website. As someone who, in the last few years, has been teaching at a university as a sideline to my main career, I see much that's admirable and worthy in that pedagogical environment. Certainly, I'm far from hostile to academia and I hope that no one forms an impression to the contrary.

On the other hand, I have observed that it's an environment that does from time to time allow utter charlatans to flourish, and I'd posit that this **** betrays every sign of being one of them. He seems to me to be a contemptible rogue who exhibits almost zero real-world knowledge in any aspect of his field of purported expertise, though as he sells himself as a specialist in finance, I'll leave comments on his skills that area to posters more qualified in it than I am.

But as he's commenting above on a matter of law, I am qualified to assess his aptitude in that sphere. My considered view is that he's legally illiterate. It's like asking Jack Duckworth to explain the theory of relativity, but it's worse than that. What's damaging is that he has a veneer of credibility that might induce people into thinking he's worth listening to, and such a layperson, in expecting enlightenment from his words, will be grievously misled.
Click to expand...
It's like footballers commenting on the game, because someone has experience in a field etc does not mean they know what they're talking about but, as you say being a name gives them both a platform and authority to the misguided masses.

I'd guess that even in your sphere you've worked with people who are at the very least limited and unfit for purpose.
 
Will we get to 9000 pages before we know WTFIGO?
Are we buying now because we're innocent?
Are we buying now because we're guilty and getting a transfer embargo.
Or just maybe we are buying now because we've let the side get old and need to strengthen whether we're innocent or guilty.
95% of what I've seen or heard in the media says we're guilty with a range of selected punishments, many of which are outside the PL's sphere of influence. Such a high level of negative comment might indicate our guilt but almost all that 95% was written but City-hating trumpets and should be ignored.
It's interesting that the media always claim to know the ins and outs of the contracts we offer players, yet none have mentioned release clauses if we have a high enough points deduction to relegate us. The players and their agents must know it's a possibility so some will have asked for assurances. Or perhaps the media, and their self-appointed experts, really know bugger all.
 
petrusha said:
Jesus Christ! Where even to start with this heap of shit? I've just looked up Professor Rob Wilson's own description of his career on his university's website. As someone who, in the last few years, has been teaching at a university as a sideline to my main career, I see much that's admirable and worthy in that pedagogical environment. Certainly, I'm far from hostile to academia and I hope that no one forms an impression to the contrary.

On the other hand, I have observed that it's an environment that does from time to time allow utter charlatans to flourish, and I'd posit that this **** betrays every sign of being one of them. He seems to me to be a contemptible rogue who exhibits almost zero real-world knowledge in any aspect of his field of purported expertise, though as he sells himself as a specialist in finance, I'll leave comments on his skills that area to posters more qualified in it than I am.

But as he's commenting above on a matter of law, I am qualified to assess his aptitude in that sphere. My considered view is that he's legally illiterate. It's like asking Jack Duckworth to explain the theory of relativity, but it's worse than that. What's damaging is that he has a veneer of credibility that might induce people into thinking he's worth listening to, and such a layperson, in expecting enlightenment from his words, will be grievously misled.
Click to expand...
The epitome of a bar-room lawyer?
 
Jam Tomorrow said:
"Broadcast revenue has absolutely nothing to do with how popular a club are or aren't with TV viewers, it's mostly based on what competitions you're in, and slightly on how far you go in them."

you've pretty much contradicted yourself there but never mind, think what you want.
Click to expand...
I’m no advertising expert but I would have thought that an advertiser would be more interested in eyes on their product rather than who those eyes belong to. I would pay more if I knew more people would actually see my product regardless of which breakfast cereal was their favourite or which football club they were currently following.
 
Damocles said:
Sheffield Hallam and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Click to expand...
I"m making a formal complaint, to follow the one about the same dept pushing blatant lies about AD's role in the Eastlands regeneration. The first is still in process but it's clear that their whole Business School setup is run by a bunch of rags imported from Stretford.
 
eastmanc said:
I am wrong in thinking that the Premier League can not enforce a transfer ban as only FIFA can introduce transfer embargos. Oh and who the fuck is Doctor Wilson.
Click to expand...

AI says...

No, FIFA is not the only organization that can impose a transfer ban on football players. Here are a few other entities that can also enforce such bans:

- **National Football Associations:** They can impose transfer bans on clubs within their jurisdiction for various reasons, such as financial mismanagement or non-compliance with national regulations.

- **UEFA (Union of European Football Associations):** For clubs participating in European competitions, UEFA can also impose transfer bans for breaches of their Financial Fair Play regulations or other UEFA rules.

- **Court Decisions:** In some cases, legal actions or court decisions can lead to transfer bans if a club is found guilty of certain legal violations, like contract disputes or labor law infringements.

- **FIFA's Judicial Bodies:** While FIFA itself can impose bans, this is often through its judicial bodies like the FIFA Disciplinary Committee or the FIFA Ethics Committee for matters like non-payment of training compensation, breach of contract, or other regulatory infractions.

Each of these bodies can act within their respective spheres of influence, though FIFA's decisions can have the broadest impact given its global jurisdiction over international football.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
I'd guess that even in [the legal] sphere you've worked with people who are at the very least limited and unfit for purpose.
Click to expand...

I won't derail the thread by discussing this in detail. I should also add that it's important for law firms to have people who are able to bring in clients, which often results from force of personality on the part of people who sometimes aren't necessarily the best lawyers in technical terms. They keep the rest of us busy and deserve to be rewarded appropriately.

But subject to that rider, your comment does strike a chord with me. I've definitely seen in my time people propelled by a talent for self-promotion to heights that a demonstrable lack of ability ought to dictate they shouldn't reach.
 
East Level 2 said:
Will we get to 9000 pages before we know WTFIGO?
Are we buying now because we're innocent?
Are we buying now because we're guilty and getting a transfer embargo.
Or just maybe we are buying now because we've let the side get old and need to strengthen whether we're innocent or guilty.
95% of what I've seen or heard in the media says we're guilty with a range of selected punishments, many of which are outside the PL's sphere of influence. Such a high level of negative comment might indicate our guilt but almost all that 95% was written but City-hating trumpets and should be ignored.
It's interesting that the media always claim to know the ins and outs of the contracts we offer players, yet none have mentioned release clauses if we have a high enough points deduction to relegate us. The players and their agents must know it's a possibility so some will have asked for assurances. Or perhaps the media, and their self-appointed experts, really know bugger all.
Click to expand...
We’re buying now because we’ve been (comparatively) shit this season
 
petrusha said:
Jesus Christ! Where even to start with this heap of shit? I've just looked up Professor Rob Wilson's own description of his career on his university's website. As someone who, in the last few years, has been teaching at a university as a sideline to my main career, I see much that's admirable and worthy in that pedagogical environment. Certainly, I'm far from hostile to academia and I hope that no one forms an impression to the contrary.

On the other hand, I have observed that it's an environment that does from time to time allow utter charlatans to flourish, and I'd posit that this **** betrays every sign of being one of them. He seems to me to be a contemptible rogue who exhibits almost zero real-world knowledge in any aspect of his field of purported expertise, though as he sells himself as a specialist in finance, I'll leave comments on his skills that area to posters more qualified in it than I am.

But as he's commenting above on a matter of law, I am qualified to assess his aptitude in that sphere. My considered view is that he's legally illiterate. It's like asking Jack Duckworth to explain the theory of relativity, but it's worse than that. What's damaging is that he has a veneer of credibility that might induce people into thinking he's worth listening to, and such a layperson, in expecting enlightenment from his words, will be grievously misled.
Click to expand...
There’s only @gordondaviesmoustache on here who could use **** and posit in the same sentence with the same aplomb.
 
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