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

Dribble said:
Because to the average uninitiated person, it all adds to the City are (1) industrial sized cheats & crooks who're (2) trying to bully football with their oil wealth narrative.

If we don't fight our corner, who will?
Click to expand...
Well, to be exact:

1) Possible
2) Is exactly what we are doing.

On point (1), we'll find out soon enough.
On point (2), more of it. Its a commercial sport. The redtops had thier moments of financial dominance, now its our turn.
 
lee one pen said:
How the fuck have PSG passed any financial tests in these last 10 years.
No money from the French league, no champions league success, no tv money.
Yet at one point they had Messi, Neymar and Mbappe upfront.
No one has ever said anything because they have been underperforming year after year.
They have only gone after us because we have dominated.
Click to expand...

Uefa fined them twice for breaking psr funny it's a small fine now but when we were getting punished with psg in 2013/14 was it? It was 50m fine squad reduction and kicked out of Europe! So to prove again it was all about punishing us!
 
waspish said:
Uefa fined them twice for breaking psr funny it's a small fine now but when we were getting punished with psg in 2013/14 was it? It was 50m fine squad reduction and kicked out of Europe! So to prove again it was all about punishing us!
Click to expand...
It does seem sometimes that the rules only exist to apply pressure on anyone who steps out of line.

Edit… or anyone whose face doesn’t fit
 
Chris in London said:
The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
Click to expand...
As I've said before, the legal fraternity on here have become seemingly fixated on the idea that the PL allegations imply there's been significant financial fraud. I can understand why you take that view but I don't agree with it.

My view is that the theme running from the 2014 settlement, where there was a dispute about related parties, through to the CAS hearing, where the panel didn't test that question but did put in their report that we may be guilty of misreporting if the Abu Dhabi-based sponsorships were related parties.

This carried on, with the issue of supposed misreporting of alleged related parties being behind the introduction of the APT, so contracts like Etihad and FAB could be examined.

So I'm convinced that the first group of the PL charges which total over 50 of the 130, is less about financial misfeasance but much more about the related party issue. If that succeeds then I doubt it would have no real impact on our finances and is unlikely to subject us to sporting penalties such as points deductions but:
  • The "cheats" label will stick.
  • We'll be forced to publish the value of the contracts.
I think our adversaries will be pleased enough with that outcome.
 
mods

what's the point in having 2 threads?

why is 115/130 constantly being discussed in this thread with absolutely no reference within those discussions to the thread title?

or shall we all just fuck off to the 115/130 thread and talk about apt and avocados in there instead?
 
waspish said:
Uefa fined them twice for breaking psr funny it's a small fine now but when we were getting punished with psg in 2013/14 was it? It was 50m fine squad reduction and kicked out of Europe! So to prove again it was all about punishing us!
Click to expand...
Maybe because their president, Nasser Al-Khelaifi is also the chairman of the European Clubs Association, the chairman of BeIN media group.
Look at his Wikipedia page and the section on legal proceedings. Makes interesting reading.
en.m.wikipedia.org

Nasser Al-Khelaifi - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
 
calumdown said:
mods

what's the point in having 2 threads?

why is 115/130 constantly being discussed in this thread with absolutely no reference within those discussions to the thread title?

or shall we all just fuck off to the 115/130 thread and talk about apt and avocados in there instead?
Click to expand...
Get on to the 'Move the away fans' thread if the moderates deem in worthy.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
As I've said before, the legal fraternity on here have become seemingly fixated on the idea that the PL allegations imply there's been significant financial fraud. I can understand why you take that view but I don't agree with it.

My view is that the theme running from the 2014 settlement, where there was a dispute about related parties, through to the CAS hearing, where the panel didn't test that question but did put in their report that we may be guilty of misreporting if the Abu Dhabi-based sponsorships were related parties.

This carried on, with the issue of supposed misreporting of alleged related parties being behind the introduction of the APT, so contracts like Etihad and FAB could be examined.

So I'm convinced that the first group of the PL charges which total over 50 of the 130, is less about financial misfeasance but much more about the related party issue. If that succeeds then I doubt it would have no real impact on our finances and is unlikely to subject us to sporting penalties such as points deductions but:
  • The "cheats" label will stick.
  • We'll be forced to publish the value of the contracts.
I think our adversaries will be pleased enough with that outcome.
Click to expand...
A 12 week trial to debate a subject accounting classification from 15 years ago and repeated in audits over and over? Sure.

Wishful thinking in the extreme. And clearly if the allegations of fraud were misplaced, both parties would have guided the press away from such a position.

Be great if you are right though.
 
Last edited:
whitenoise said:
Think that was a mistake on our part, but we probably thought playing nice and showing goodwill would be replicated. Bet we don't fall for that again.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt that Etihad falls within the scope of the APT rules for the simple reason they were written that way on purpose.

There is an argument to be had that it falls within the scope of the RPT rules as well, let's not kid ourselves, but 16 years of careful consideration by the auditors of City and Etihad tells me they have strong grounds for their position and any arguments against that position would have to be really convincing to be successful. I doubt such convincing arguments exist but things like this is where lawyers make their money. It's the law that is an ass, after all, not accountancy.
 
halfcenturyup said:
There is no doubt that Etihad falls within the scope of the APT rules for the simple reason they were written that way on purpose.

There is an argument to be had that it falls within the scope of the RPT rules as well, let's not kid ourselves, but 16 years of careful consideration by the auditors of City and Etihad tells me they have strong grounds for their position and any arguments against that position would have to be really convincing to be successful. I doubt such convincing arguments exist but things like this is where lawyers make their money. It's the law that is an ass, after all, not accountancy.
Click to expand...
City themselves declared it to be an APT. Pointless debate. 1739741515393.png
 
slbsn said:
A 12 week trial to debate a subject accounting classification from 15 years ago and repeated in audits over and over? Sure.

Wishful thinking in the extreme. And clearly if the allegations of fraud were misplaced, both parties would have guided the press away from such a position.

Be great if you are right though.
Click to expand...

I’ve always thought any actual fraudulent accounting (if the PLs argument is the same as UEFAs) would potentially be with Etihad rather than ourselves, aside from the RPT declaration.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
What about the PL’s conduct hitherto would make you believe that they would do that?
Click to expand...
Even if you think that, the club would have guided in a different direction if the concensus was wrong. Every journalist with City connections describes the situation the same (eg Sam Lee, Simon Bajowski, Martin Blackburn, Matt Slater, Dan Sheldon, Paul Hirst)
 
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