City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

JASR said:
Indeed.

Compare this evenhanded, unbiased, knowledgeable and factual presentation of the minutiae about City…
…and the absolute tsunami of blinkered, knee-jerk, cartel arse licking, cherry-picking, misrepresentations given out by almost all the media and their flock of sheep followers.

I’d want a balanced, nuanced, accurate, insightful examination of the facts, any day of the week and twice on match days.
Click to expand...
Yep. Leave the celebratory gifs and memes to idiots like me!
 
arbabarshad said:
Given the amount of scrutiny city have had from the PL, I think PLs internal processes should be reviewed to see if all clubs receive the same amount of scrutiny or not? Theoretically the answer should be yes but it would be interesting to know.
Click to expand...
think there are three departments that look into it
one with 30 professional staff that deals with us
one with 7 professional staff that deals with 15 clubs
one with 1 staff (seconded from the marketing team who WFH only 3 days a week) for 4 clubs
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It seems the worst case scenario here is that 3 or 4 wealthy clubs dominated the league? This didn't seem to be an issue in the 90s when sky could confidently bill 'super sundays' (clashes between the top 4) as soon as the seasons fixtures were announced.
Click to expand...
Is there a club without a billionaire owner? The issue is they don’t want to put up the £
 
dickie davies said:
The authorities will be waiting for the outcome of the tribunal before deciding on any action

If you look at the Post Office scandal, people were wrongly imprisoned and witnesses committed perjury, but no one responsible for those miscarriages of justice and wrongdoings has been charged and it won't happen until the conclusions of the inquiry have been studied

Police investigating crimes linked to the Post Office Horizon IT scandal are looking at "dozens" of potential suspects, but don't expect trials to begin until 2027.

Police are investigating possible crimes by Post Office and Fujitsu employees and external lawyers, following the wrongful prosecution of hundreds of subpostmasters after faulty Horizon software said money was missing from their Post Office branch accounts.

Three suspects have already been interviewed under caution and there are plans to interview others next year, according to police.

But no one will be charged until officers have read the final report from the separate public inquiry, almost 30 years after concerns were first raised.
Click to expand...
So this goes to the very heart of what I'm saying!

Where is the:

"Police investigating crimes linked to the Manchester City fraud, money laundering & tax evasion accusations are looking at "dozens" of potential suspects, but don't expect trials to begin until 2027."

This is my exact point. The police are conducting parallel investigations. Why haven't the media (who've a lot to say about this) ever said they've asked the authorities about City? Has anyone from City ever been interviewed about these serious allegations, with the apparent truck loads of evidence against us?
 
Dribble said:
Well perhaps you'd like to step in & explain what Stefan has claimed for him & why the authorities haven't yet descended on the Etihad regarding our alleged criminality?

Answer me this simple question & perhaps the whole premise of FFP, PSR & APT will become clear.

On a final note, can you show me which points I've disagreed with him on? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
It could also be that any issues the PL have with us haven't actually broken any laws.
For example, if the Mancini contract is something they're looking at, in regards to the SFO or HMRC as long as everyone has paid the correct tax and the correct figures are in the correct books of all companies involved then why would they care?
The issue with the Premier League wouldn't be to do with had the correct tax been paid it would be more that they say those payments should be under City's accounts and we say they shouldn't, at that point it comes down to whether the links between Sheikh Mansour and the Abu Dhabi club that were paying Mancini can be classed as owner disguised payments or not which isn't a fraud issue, it's a boring as fuck accounting issue.
A lot of this nonsense could come down to dull accounting procedures, City argue that payment X should be listed in column A of spreadsheet 23.802 but the PL say that it should be in column B due to obscure accounting practice Gibbs V Johnson 1872 and this means City haven't produced full and accurate records of their accounts, City maintain that the precedent of Kafka v Davies 1911 overrules the Gibbs scenario and on and on and on.
Breaking the Premier League's own rules which have been written so badly and with so many glaring gaps doesn't necessarily mean it's a legal issue.
I think this is why there has been such misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the CAS findings (with a dash of cartel PR and muck slinging), there was no smoking gun, no juicy details of offshore accounts and secret deals, it was all just rather dry and boring interpretations of spreadsheets and multifaceted accounting practices, none of which sells newspapers or generates clicks from the hard of thinking.
 
Dribble said:
So this goes to the very heart of what I'm saying!

Where is the:

"Police investigating crimes linked to the Manchester City fraud, money laundering & tax evasion accusations are looking at "dozens" of potential suspects, but don't expect trials to begin until 2027."

This is my exact point. The police are conducting parallel investigations. Why haven't the media (who've a lot to say about this) ever said they've asked the authorities about City? Has anyone from City ever been interviewed about these serious allegations, with the apparent truck loads of evidence against us?
Click to expand...
FFS!
In the post office scandal, it’s already been proven that perjury had taken place and that’s before the police launch a full investigation
Nothing has been proven in regards to City
How many times was “no evidence” quoted in the CAS summary?
 
slbsn said:
Some thoughts on reflection about the PL's issue.
Click to expand...


Hmmm .... Surely there is no historic shareholder loan interest problem any more, because all the rules are void since inception (to 2024 at least) and so there are no APT assessments to which shareholder interest must be applied historically? What am I missing?
 
halfcenturyup said:
That's a mighty intellect who has to quote Sam fucking Wallace rather than give his own opinion. What is the point of that guy? At least Solkehol had an opinion.
Click to expand...

Gaslighting the viewers!

If ever you need to think have City got it all under control then you watch this. No mention it won’t affect us cos we’ll be in the nation league.
 
applecentral said:
Stefan,

I missed your talksport program. Is there a link so I can watch it again. Don’t let people get you down. There are lots of us here you hold you in high esteem and respect your intellect regarding legal matters. In fact on this blog there are several learned people who have great input into the debate.
I urge one and all to respect every posters opinions and to not attack people whose opinion may differ from yours. With the 115 charges result due in soon I for one will be looking for Stefans opinions and others who are far more knowledgeable than myself.
We are all together fighting the Cartel. I see signs it’s all going to end up in City’s favour and the Cartel clubs will be facing potential lawsuits and investigations. The Red Cartel will rule the day they took on The Behemoth that Man City has become.
Click to expand...
Do you think red cartel are genuinely out to destroy us or know that their actions towards us may well lead to destruction of PL and opening the door to the ESL with the financial rewards which may save them? I’m sure they’d like both. It’s why I just can’t comprehend why mid table (not what it used to mean ;) ) are siding with the cartel. Cartel f#ck off to ESL and leave the Fulham’s in the equivalent of the SPL.
 
danielwood5 said:
It could also be that any issues the PL have with us haven't actually broken any laws.
For example, if the Mancini contract is something they're looking at, in regards to the SFO or HMRC as long as everyone has paid the correct tax and the correct figures are in the correct books of all companies involved then why would they care?
The issue with the Premier League wouldn't be to do with had the correct tax been paid it would be more that they say those payments should be under City's accounts and we say they shouldn't, at that point it comes down to whether the links between Sheikh Mansour and the Abu Dhabi club that were paying Mancini can be classed as owner disguised payments or not which isn't a fraud issue, it's a boring as fuck accounting issue.
A lot of this nonsense could come down to dull accounting procedures, City argue that payment X should be listed in column A of spreadsheet 23.802 but the PL say that it should be in column B due to obscure accounting practice Gibbs V Johnson 1872 and this means City haven't produced full and accurate records of their accounts, City maintain that the precedent of Kafka v Davies 1911 overrules the Gibbs scenario and on and on and on.
Breaking the Premier League's own rules which have been written so badly and with so many glaring gaps doesn't necessarily mean it's a legal issue.
I think this is why there has been such misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the CAS findings (with a dash of cartel PR and muck slinging), there was no smoking gun, no juicy details of offshore accounts and secret deals, it was all just rather dry and boring interpretations of spreadsheets and multifaceted accounting practices, none of which sells newspapers or generates clicks from the hard of thinking.
Click to expand...

The allegations almost certainly amount to fraud, surely we aren't opening that one up again? The 115 case is a civil matter between two contracted parties to consider civil remedies. If it appears from the judgment that there may be a criminal case to answer there may or may not be an action in the criminal courts. The fact that there has been no criminal investigation at the moment means nothing. That's all there is to it.

Do I have to post my 2000 word analysis again? I will if provoked.

You can argue that it points towards a lack of evidence supporting a criminal action, which may or may not be true, but it means nothing conclusively. It's not worth this much discussion when we could be talking about @Didsbury Dave 's youthful adventures :)
 
halfcenturyup said:
Hmmm .... Surely there is no historic shareholder loan interest problem any more, because all the rules are void since inception (to 2024 at least) and so there are no APT assessments to which shareholder interest must be applied historically? What am I missing?
Click to expand...
That the PLs position is that the November 2024 are new rules and are lawful.
 
Funnny isn't it that when old spitting image head Jack Walker came along and bank rolled the yonners to the league it was a fairy tale, no financial restraints then of course, we all know why UEFA and subsequently national football associations brought in financial constraints, fuck all to do with stopping clubs going insolvent which was their lying premise but because the usual suspects in european football eg AC Milan, Inter, Juventus, Bayern, Madrid, Barca,rags, bindippers, arse, spurs( ha!) etc couid see City and PSG and other clubs potentially in the future fucking up their gravy train which of course has come to fruition, the likes of Sam fuckin Wallace pretending football was some egalitarian competition is just fuckin laughable. MCFC OK!
 
halfcenturyup said:
That's a mighty intellect who has to quote Sam fucking Wallace rather than give his own opinion. What is the point of that guy? At least Solkehol had an opinion.
Click to expand...
What makes me laugh is no one seems to pick up that if inflated sponsorships were not governed before APT then why didn’t City do it then? Also spouting about the team’s with the most resources benefitting….how’s that working out for the Rags?
 
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