PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[madloaf]

10 quid each. No slight intended with the pink by the way....

 

[slbsn]

And if that’s the case. You either know someone high up at the Etihad. Which I doubt is either Khaldoon or Cliff. So I’d say you know nothing like everyone else on this site

Correct. Either I'm bessies with Khaldoon or I know no more than you. Those are the only 2 possibilities. You got me.

 

[slbsn]

View attachment 162490

10 quid each. No slight intended by the pink by the way....

Not even white with red and black sash? Pink? FFS

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I hope Prestwich is right.
Amateur Geek 1 Pro Geek 0.
Sorry boys, just joshing.

They can both be right. No one is suggesting the decision has been officially released yet. But I would be amazed if there have not been some back office channels with such a hugely political and sensitive issue. This is the way the world works.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Rule X is not the same as Rule W ie this is Disciplinary and not APT like arbitration. It has to be released. Rule X stuff doesn't

I remember a wise man once saying:

"It is akin to a commercial arbitration (albeit a disciplinary). There is scope for the parties and the panel to agree sensible timings."

And this:

"Also this is not court, the Panel are likely to consult with the parties about their commercial needs as to timing where possible. Very likely any special requirements on timing and distribution of drafts have been discussed with the Chair and the parties are likely to have grown up discussions about the timing of this publication."

Granted I may have misunderstood nuances. It has been known to happen.

 

[slbsn]

They can both be right. No one is suggesting the decision has been officially released yet. But I would be amazed if there have not been some back office channels with such a hugely political and sensitive issue. This is the way the world works.

That isn't what he said but the idea that the PL go to all the trouble of a huge trial and formal serious allegations over 12 weeks with hundreds of lawyers and millions of pounds and then want to get all careful about being political is not very unlikely unless you believe that the Panel have absolutely thrown the book at City. And even then I can't see it and nor would that fit with PB's suggestion that the PL want the delay. So, in fact, this is not the way the world works.

 

[KS55]

They can both be right. No one is suggesting the decision has been officially released yet. But I would be amazed if there have not been some back office channels with such a hugely political and sensitive issue. This is the way the world works.

We’ll see this year, next year, sometime, never. Whoever is in control has no compassion for us poor fans.

 

[cheekybids]

I think the decision had been provided & the panel are duty bound to accept it.

In the movie A United Kingdom, Jack Davenport plays the part of colonial bureaucrat Sir Alistair Canning who turns up in his white suit & tells all involved how it plays out. We are talking about an Emirati Royal versus Richard Masters.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Lets work on the basis that I have no information and am completely wrong.

What plausible explanation can anyone offer as to how despite the release of the decision months ago, the only person in the whole of the World with any sort of platform that has been informed of this incredible story is on Bluemoon. It has not leaked anywhere else, it is not rumoured in any column, not by any club, not by any journalist, not in any DM I have ever received etc etc. How is the one person with this EXPLOSIVE story, PB.

And no, that doesn't apply to my "nobody knows yet". Nobody knows yet is the commonly held view across all clubs, all journalists, all people around the Bar, all people in the sports disputes world. So, if true PB, is sitting on a global exclusive.

How has this incredible story remained so secret but slipped out just the once and into the hands of PB. What an incredible turn of events.

Isn't it just.

 

[waspish]

I remember a wise man once saying:

"It is akin to a commercial arbitration (albeit a disciplinary). There is scope for the parties and the panel to agree sensible timings."

And this:

"Also this is not court, the Panel are likely to consult with the parties about their commercial needs as to timing where possible. Very likely any special requirements on timing and distribution of drafts have been discussed with the Chair and the parties are likely to have grown up discussions about the timing of this publication."

Granted I may have misunderstood nuances. It has been known to happen.

If that’s true means they could sit on it! You only can sit on it if you know the outcome!

 

[TheGhost]

So let me get this straight.

1. The panel made its decision in April or May and have communicated their decision to both parties at that time
2. Very senior people at Manchester City have known the result of the hearing for the best part of 3 months but nothing has leaked.
3. Very senior people at the Premier League have known the result of the hearing for the best part of 3 months but nothing has leaked.
4. City have won the case.
5. City have then agreed to wait 3 months while a new CEO is secretly being recruited for the Premier League for reason unknown and despite this case causing huge reputational damage to the club.
6. Everyone in the recruitment process will now also know the outcome but again nothing has leaked.
7. Every single journalist in world would sell their own children to get the scoop on the biggest story in the history of world football, which has been out in the wild for 3 months. It’s a story that could literally make a journalist’s career. But nothing has leaked.
8. But Colin from Accounts has broke the biggest story in world football on this forum. 5 weeks ago.
9. We know that football journalists read this forum but it’s been ignored and no one has tried to run the story.

Is this what we’re expected to believe?

If all of the above is true then I’ll personally buy PB a bottle of champagne

 

[Marklr]

What has pb said?

I can't remember now...I've had my herbal medication...but it was good, anyway. Something about 'barms' being right.

 

[DJBusinesscake]

@slbsn I trust your information above others on here, but I think we both know PB isnt making shit up, so do you reckon he has been lied to?

 

[slbsn]

I remember a wise man once saying:

"It is akin to a commercial arbitration (albeit a disciplinary). There is scope for the parties and the panel to agree sensible timings."

And this:

"Also this is not court, the Panel are likely to consult with the parties about their commercial needs as to timing where possible. Very likely any special requirements on timing and distribution of drafts have been discussed with the Chair and the parties are likely to have grown up discussions about the timing of this publication."

Granted I may have misunderstood nuances. It has been known to happen.

Both of these were about release of the decision not a delay post release save for the one scenario we discussed where only the liability bit was done pending a sanction hearing. The scenario painted in my comment above was one where there is no further hearing. In that case the rule is clear. Once the decision is communicated to the parties and published by the Panel (the timing of which is subject to discussion), then it is to be released as soon as practicable.

I don't believe I have suggested that once the parties have the decision they can agree a release schedule for this beyond rule W.49 (as contrasted with the equivalent provisions in Rule X). If I have, let me know. These quotes aren't that as far as can see.

I would add as soon as practicable builds in some 1-5 day flex post publication by the panel. Not 3 months.

 

[DJBusinesscake]

Isn't it just.

Come on mate, have a discussion. We all want your information to be correct, but you have to agree from an outsiders points of view, it does seem mad unlikely.

 

[slbsn]

@slbsn I trust your information above others on here, but I think we both know PB isnt making shit up, so do you reckon he has been lied to?

Lied to, misinterpreted, told a rumour - dunno. But it is wrong, I know that.

 

[slbsn]

Isn't it just.

Seriously, how do you explain this incredible story has only got to you and not been published anywhere? It is clearly the biggest sports story of the decade (City have won, PL have hidden it, PL want to get rid of Masters without telling the shareholders the result (because they can't tell the clubs for fear of a leak), the appeal process is somehow suspended or there won't be any appeal by the PL etc). You have to accept this is an incredible story if true. So how come only you have it. In the entire World? And you weren't even told it confidentially because you have been prepared to say it here. And if the person who told you, didn't require confidentiality, why haven't they told other people?

 

[Gordyola]

That's a lot of work?? I dont see how something like this could take so long. Put aside the repetition and it's just six or seven charges is it not?

12 weeks of evidence to consider from a lot of witnesses, would also need consult legal precedent They won’t be working on it ever day as they will have other commitments so ultimately it hasn’t taken as long as it appears The three of them will need to meet so, dairies need to be aligned Then there is a detailed and precise judgement to write up which, will go to hundreds of pages, double checked and checked again When it’s ready it’s ready It might also not be the end, only a judgement will be announced Then there is a possibility of appeals If guilty a sentencing tribunal will have to meet it could easily go on deep into the year or even beyond

 

[remember arthur mann]

So let me get this straight.

1. The panel made its decision in April or May and have communicated their decision to both parties at that time
2. Very senior people at Manchester City have known the result of the hearing for the best part of 3 months but nothing has leaked.
3. Very senior people at the Premier League have known the result of the hearing for the best part of 3 months but nothing has leaked.
4. City have won the case.
5. City have then agreed to wait 3 months while a new CEO is secretly being recruited for the Premier League for reason unknown and despite this case causing huge reputational damage to the club.
6. Everyone in the recruitment process will now also know the outcome but again nothing has leaked.
7. Every single journalist in world would sell their own children to get the scoop on the biggest story in the history of world football, which has been out in the wild for 3 months. It’s a story that could literally make a journalist’s career. But nothing has leaked.
8. But Colin from Accounts has broke the biggest story in world football on this forum. 5 weeks ago.
   
9. We know that football journalists read this forum but it’s been ignored and no one has tried to run the story.

Is this what we’re expected to believe?

If all of the above is true then I’ll personally buy PB a bottle of champagne

I don't think he drinks.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

I'll believe it when Ian Cheeseman says it.