PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Yeah, it gets tiresome seeing good posters getting continually questioned or hounded by some people demanding to know their sources. I know everyone is a bit on edge with the verdict due soon, but let’s not turn on each other.

You want some?

 

[Rory Bluelow]

Where I drink at a weekend it’s wall to wall football talk , fans from many a club and not just the usual suspects , everyone’s opinion is clouded by the 115 , to a man they think it’s 115 seperate wrongdoings - and it was designed that way by Masters and his arse licking sidekicks , designed to ruin our integrity from the very start.
The shit has stuck I’m afraid , and the sport can get to fuck for me , it’s as bent as fuck.

Fucking bang on mate. They knew exactly what they were doing. Heads need to roll all over that shit-bent EPL wankstain of an organisation. I wouldn’t piss on those cunts if they were on fire !

 

[xgorton]

Just reply with 84,569 to the tarquin ****.

My old man was at that game aged just 21 then off to war few years later.

 

[TheGhost]

Well said fella!

There is so much of this that is so wildly misreported and most people now have a completely distorted view of this whole affair.

The Premier League case is based on exactly the same source as the UEFA case. So what CAS stated is so relevant to this.

Many have tried to discredit CAS, yet this is a panel of highly respected barristers (and equivalents) across Europe applying the relevant laws and rules to judge the case. Whilst UEFA is wildly regarding as a corrupt organisation of racketeers that routinely treats its customers like dirt (Istanbul x 2, Paris, Heysel etc).


In the 95 page CAS report the word "Blatant" was written once. Dan Roan (Liverpool fan and head journalist of BBC sport) wrote a summary where he described City as showing a "Blatant Disregard" for the process/rules no fewer that 17 times. I complained about this to the BBC and the article has since been edited, and now only includes the phrase about 9 times.


Many journalists trot out the line that City only got off at CAS because it was time barred. This is not true. CAS published a conclusion explaining their decision. The £10m Etisalat deal was time barred (para 343 vi), yet only part of the £40m Etihad deal was. Therefore the bigger of the two, the Etihad deal, was considered and not time barred.


Paragraph 209 of the CAS report states clearly the the only evidence UEFA had against City was the emails published by der Spiegel. CAS considered this as admissible evidence (para 343 vii) and that it considered this was not sufficient to prove City had done what was alleged (para 343 viii).



Remember also, it was Martin Ziegler in The Timea who broke the story and his analysis of the information he was given (115 charges) was wildly different to the statement published two hours later by the Premier League (134 charges). For example Ziegler referenced 30 rule breaches RE non co-operation, yet the Premier League statement included 25 on this issue....

So even the 115 figure is wrong.

Neither The Times nor Ziegler have offered any explanation for these discrepancies or how Ziegler had a screenshot of the Premier League post 2 hours before the Premier League actually published their statement charging City?



The most revealing thing about the CAS hearing was that Email 4 published in der Spiegel, was shown by City to be two separate emails spliced together to give a false impression. So either, City were lying at CAS when making this claim, or someone on the other side (der Spiegel, Pinto or the actual hacker) had fabricated this email. Since no one on the "other side" has tried to disprove what City showed 4-5 years ago, you have to assume that everything City said was true and that this was a stitch up from the start.



So when you take all these things together and compare them to what is trotted out by the British media, at all levels, you know full well they are deliberately or naively misleading the general public.



I don't think you can assume anything published about this to be true, other than what is written in the Premier League handbooks and what is published on their website. For example, Rule W82 sets out what must be published when any club is charged (ie the charges and the result).



What is interesting is that out of everything listed in the allegations/charges, rule E59* is the only rule that City have allegedly breached, that triggers the disciplinary steps/action taken so far. To trigger E59 City have to break PSR and that relies on proving in full the first two allegations. If either fail, City have to be cleared.

*I've not managed to find EPL hand books before 2012 so I might be wrong here, but I doubt it.

I went through the figures and I can't see how even if allegations 1 and 2 are 100% proven that City break PSR ie rule E59. I calculated the losses if the case is proven to be:

£108,113,000: 2013-2016

-£75,263,000: 2014-2017

-£66,157,000: 2015-2018


My analysis:

Manchester City Allegation 4 – Analysis - ManCityStuff

A proper look at how the numbers add up. In the intricate web of football finance, where numbers and figures can often be as slippery as the pitches the players compete on, the case against Manchester City and the financial practices under scrutiny require a deep dive into the club's financials...

mancitystuff.co.uk

However, when calculating the above, I overlooked the fact that in der Spiegel's evidence they stated Etihad had contributed £8.3m each year out of the £40m. So the above figures should be adjusted by £25m (3x8.3) ie:

-£83,113,000: 2013-2016

-£50,263,000: 2014-2017

-£41,157,000: 2015-2018

City are nowhere near the £105m loss figure.

I'm surprised no one in our media has tried to do the above, even Football Finance expert Kieran MacGuire who should understand it hasn't bothered.

I can't see how City can be found guilty of these charges other than for non-co-operation.

I know the square root of fuck all but aren’t the allowed £105m losses for over a 3 year period? And not £105m a year.

 

[Ric]

Sorry to be a spoilsport but I think mods need to make this on topic discussion only now.

Last week there were hundreds of pages with not a lot of actual discussion of the alleged breaches. I spend enough time on here as it is without reading through shite hoping to find a needle in a haystack.

Do think there should be an off topic thread though where people can talk absolute bollocks (mainly like this thread over the past week) not really related to any one topic. Would be good if you could just casually read it instead of on here where you need to actually pay attention in case anything important is said.

When there aren’t many actual developments to discuss, threads like this do tend to veer off topic. That sort of irreverent nonsense has always been part of the forum’s fabric. Agree that it probably has gone a bit far in recent days though, so will keep an eye on that. A good way to just keep up to date with more meaningful info is to follow the posters whose opinions you respect, then when you click on your news feed you’ll get more of a synopsis of what’s going on. Or put certain posters on ignore, as someone else suggested.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Spelt Irrelevant wrong.

Anyway it would be good if when someone itk posts something,, dont let the forum meltdown, fueling twitter that then gets posted back here. The whole thing is a bit insidious.

 

[TedofChume]

I know the square root of fuck all but aren’t the allowed £105m losses for over a 3 year period? And not £105m a year.

Yes they are. Isn't that what I have said?

 

[eyalluvitt]

Where I drink at a weekend it’s wall to wall football talk , fans from many a club and not just the usual suspects , everyone’s opinion is clouded by the 115 , to a man they think it’s 115 seperate wrongdoings - and it was designed that way by Masters and his arse licking sidekicks , designed to ruin our integrity from the very start.
The shit has stuck I’m afraid , and the sport can get to fuck for me , it’s as bent as fuck.

I ask them do the players/staff who signed after 2018 deserve to be punished for historical financial decisions certain pen pushers at the club may or may not have made to combat the ever changing FFP rulebook a decade ago, and they all say YES

 

[CoventryBlue]

I think it's pretty poor that we have so many leaks coming from the club in the first place. It's clear we've got people in the club who can't help themselves letting people (who clearly have platforms - TH, Ahsan, Cheeseman, MarkMcarthy etc.) know snippets here and there

It's either BS from the ITKs or we've got people working in and around the club who shouldn't be. Neither are particularly "good" things

 

[ComfySeats]

They aren't just accused of breaking PL rules mate, they're accused of financial fraud. They would 100% be liable to be disqualified if charges are proven.

It would be hard to think of a more serious allegation towards a company's board then what the PL are accusing ours of

This is the thing that continually makes me think it's a load of old tosh with respect to the finance side of the allegations. I have been involved in multiple audits, from the start of my career as an accounts assistant providing copies of invoices etc to what I do know (migrate financial information from old to new systems). I don't see how the club could get through standard financial audits for submitting financial accounts, to due diligence audits for when percentages of cfg were sold. And supposedly have all types of dodgy dealings going on.

I know people will scream about enron on other large scale financial fraud but what people are forgetting is the owners of Man City are not going to risk billions for a few million. IMO anyway logically it makes no sense. The likes of enron were robbing people city were not, unless you can spend tears and boiled piss.

Anyway hopefully we get the news we all want tomorrow and I win the Euromilluons on Tuesday. I'll buy a box at United and wall paper it blue.

 

[york away to this!]

When there aren’t many actual developments to discuss, threads like this do tend to veer off topic. That sort of irreverent nonsense has always been part of the forum’s fabric. Agree that it probably has gone a bit far in recent days though, so will keep an eye on that. A good way to just keep up to date with more meaningful info is to follow the posters whose opinions you respect, then when you click on your news feed you’ll get more of a synopsis of what’s going on. Or put certain posters on ignore, as someone else suggested.

He should just ignore all the cunts waffling on about soup puns, chickens, muffin/barm shite, viz, best place for breakfast, top ten gimps, the Smiths and so on.
He'd then have the whole thread to himself...

 

[slbsn]

I think it's pretty poor that we have so many leaks coming from the club in the first place. It's clear we've got people in the club who can't help themselves letting people (who clearly have platforms - TH, Ahsan, Cheeseman, Stefan, MarkMcarthy etc.) know snippets here and there

It's either BS from the ITKs or we've got people working in and around the club who shouldn't be. Neither are particularly "good" things

Keep me out of this one. Nobody from the club has told me anything that I’ve shared here. Plus, as I said, I have very few club contacts.

 

[mscenterh750]

Fanny Craddock knocking around?

 

[CoventryBlue]

@slbsn

But they'll have told someone who then in turn told you. It's just as bad. When the club is under such attack, the fact we've had people telling TH stuff for the best part of twenty years is a disgrace and leaks from "the horse's mouth" over something like this, it's worrying

 

[mscenterh750]

Honestly this thread will put some people in straight jackets and buddying up with Jack Nicholson. Just chill let the thread run free and wild. The verdict will come in good time so stop frothing and getting irate at things that get said or not said. Peace out motherfuckers and smoke a bifter.

 

[CC1]

I think it's pretty poor that we have so many leaks coming from the club in the first place. It's clear we've got people in the club who can't help themselves letting people (who clearly have platforms - TH, Ahsan, Cheeseman, MarkMcarthy etc.) know snippets here and there

It's either BS from the ITKs or we've got people working in and around the club who shouldn't be. Neither are particularly "good" things

What leaks from the club are you talking about. I thought the general consensus was that there was NOTHING coming out of the club to either the media or our “ITKs”

 

[slbsn]

@slbsn

But they'll have told someone who then in turn told you. It's just as bad. When the club is under such attack, the fact we've had people telling TH stuff for the best part of twenty years is a disgrace

Not necessarily. Many people outside of the club on the other side of deals, cases, situations plus lots of people in advisory businesses outside the club. Very little has come into the public domain from the club on 115 as far as I can tell. Almost nothing of substance.

Transfers are just totally different - it’s an industry built on rumour and fake competitive tension.

 

[CoventryBlue]

@CC1

Anything an ITK says comes from a leak somewhere, that's why they're so protective of their sources right??

Either they're making it all up (they aren't) or we have leakers (we do)

It's not the end of the world btw, but when people are laying into ITKs a bit, I just think the real enemy are the people who feed the info

 

[CC1]

@CC1

Anything an ITK says comes from a leak somewhere, that's why they're so protective of their sources right??

Either they're making it all up (they aren't) or we have leakers

That doesn’t mean it’s come from our club. It could have come from any of the PL clubs & their media contacts. That’s how Zeigler gets his info - supposedly.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

@slbsn

But they'll have told someone who then in turn told you. It's just as bad. When the club is under such attack, the fact we've had people telling TH stuff for the best part of twenty years is a disgrace and leaks from "the horse's mouth" over something like this, it's worrying