PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Bald fraud]

BIG DAY TOMORROW?

Bet next season will be well underway and we still won’t have heard fuck all!

 

[johnny crossan]

Stefan had two boiled eggs this morning.

 

[Centurions]

My take on this has always been the same from day one. The "information requested by the PL" is "give us the information we need to find you guilty, because we've been trying to find something on you for the past decade but we haven't been able to".

"If you don't give us the information to find you guilty with, then we'll find you guilty of non-cooperation, regardless if we didn't ask for that particular information in the first place".

Given the poor wording of their rules, they could actually do that as well.

 

[pauls]

"If you don't give us the information to find you guilty with, then we'll find you guilty of non-cooperation, regardless if we didn't ask for that particular information in the first place".

Given the poor wording of their rules, they could actually do that as well.

Given how much time and money the Club have spent on this any letter out of place will be seized upon by our lawyers, which is possibly why it's taking so bloody long.

 

[blueyorkie]

Now for the good news, PL has actively stabbed the golden goose, United need to sell entire squad due to PSR they wrote.

That’s a really good point

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Just been reading the report on utd finances, and how we are not quite sure how close to PSR limits they are because "It is not clear what they have been allowed to claim back as legitimate expense and therefore how close they are to the limit"
I am sure our clubs legal teams will be watching very closely exactly what and how they claim things back as legitimate expense.
I have a feeling the financial landscape has changed so that they can't get away with the financial levers they get to use.
I want that club screwed.

 

[dadnlad]

Just been reading the report on utd finances, and how we are not quite sure how close to PSR limits they are because "It is not clear what they have been allowed to claim back as legitimate expense and therefore how close they are to the limit"
I am sure our clubs legal teams will be watching very closely exactly what and how they claim things back as legitimate expense.
I have a feeling the financial landscape has changed so that they can't get away with the financial levers they get to use.
I want that club screwed.

Going to spend another 60 million they know exempt from rules

 

[ysmsa]

Surely it's one of only two ? Either Heinz tomato or HP ?

HP, the sauce of choice at the Swamp.

Along with everything else, all on HP.

 

[MarsLlama]

They’ve done the sufficient reputational damage, I don’t think they’ll be in any rush anymore

 

[Mifred]

HP, the sauce of choice af the Swamp.

Along with everything else, all on HP.

No sugar DADDIES

 

[Father Paul]

Right that's the season over with, let's have the result let's get this over and done with once and for all .

Seems incredible that this would be allowed to meander on any further. At this stage an interim report and main findings should be available even if the finer detailed report would not arrive until a bit later. I think City should be ready to look for a judicial review regarding this unholy fiasco if this is not ended by the time the WCC starts.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

From what others have said on here both parties have some say in the time and maneer of the release of the judgement? If it is largely in our favour, then the pl could be skirting close to being found to have caused damage to the business (club) anyway? To delay it further out of spite and compromise another transfer window or potential investment is surely a risky strategy.

The Judges will decide timing but they may listen to opinions from both parties. There are issues like share prices and other commercial impacts which may impact some of our sponsors for example (if we lose). There is a potential for multiple ongoing legal actions from all sorts of places including other clubs. The Judges will be sensitive to these sort of issues.

 

[Gazza]

No sugar DADDIES

There's always Richard Branston.

 

[Norbiton]

There's always Richard Branston.

OK

 

[Mifred]

There's always Richard Branston.

Got me in a pickle

 

[applecentral]

No sugar DADDIES

I’m trying to ketchup with you.

 

[JRockBlues]

They'll do what they always do and buy on HP

 

[Mifred]

I’m trying to ketchup with you.

Tartare now

 

[halfcenturyup]

The Judges will decide timing but they may listen to opinions from both parties. There are issues like share prices and other commercial impacts which may impact some of our sponsors for example (if we lose). There is a potential for multiple ongoing legal actions from all sorts of places including other clubs. The Judges will be sensitive to these sort of issues.

Are you sure that is right? I would think the opposite. The panel won't care about what the two parties want or what their commercial interests are. They will issue it to the two parties whenever it's finished.

When it's published publicly is up to the two parties, though. Not that I think anything has happened yet, tbh.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Are you sure that is right? I would think the opposite. The panel won't care about what the two parties want or what their commercial interests are. They will issue it to the two parties whenever it's finished.

When it's published publicly is up to the two parties, though. Not that I think anything has happened yet, tbh.

All I know is that I have been involved in numerous similar arbitration type hearings (not exactly the same) and I was surprised at the high volume of informal conversations between the independent Judges and both parties before the statements were published. There were backdoor channels relating to the timing of public statements and all three groups spoke to each other. The cases I was involved in were high profile and very media and politically sensitive.