PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I'm not sure this idea that the PL leaks like a sieve holds much water any more. At least not since the existence of the APT case was leaked (by Arsenal we all suppose) in June last year was it? I always thought the PL had been through the wringer for that with the arbitration panel. I wouldn't he surprised if they are now water-tight.

Can anyone suggest any leaking by the PL or its member clubs since then?, Other than by City, strangely enough.

There was that Muhammed business a couple of months ago, but that was just stirring by the usual press suspects and was nothing new. I can't think of anything else.

Not saying there is anything conclusive in @Prestwich_Blue 's post but the lack of leaks can't be used to discredit it, imho, and the difficulty in keeping a recruitment confidential can't either because that was his personal conjecture, not what he had heard from his source.
 
calumdown said:
i'm not convinced you can say it is clearly horseshit.
pb may have been lied to and be posting in good faith.
you have no way of disproving that.

i'll repost what i suggested yesterday...
Click to expand...
I'd maybe be inclined to want to believe that had that been the story from the start.
 
roy.or.r said:
To me I believe Stefan not because I think PB is making shit up. But I believe his claim to be very unrealistic, especially with how City have agreed to a delay to help PL find a replacement for Masters. I understand from a diplomatic sense but considering we have been burned so many times by the cartel clubs who are clearly more important to the PL, I doubt we would be fooled again.
Click to expand...
I've no desire to keep this going round in circles but my point about the PL looking for a Masters replacement was purely speculative.

I'm even prepared to accept Stefan's point that the formal outcome isn't yet known although I've never claimed that a document consisting of hundreds of pages is sitting in a locked drawer at the Etihad somewhere. But I'll accept I could be wrong on that and it could be no more than they're pretty certain of the outcome, rather than they know it for sure.

But I'm 100% sticking with the claim that the PL will come out of this very badly indeed when the outcome is known, and whatever they're trying to do to manage that is the reason for the delay.
 
Whether or not said:
Obviously I have no idea whether the club have been officially told the outcome or not. But, there is a middle ground between having been actually told the result, and knowing what the result is going to be. It is feasible that as the proceedings went on and the evidence was heard, that the fine legal minds on both sides could clearly see where the case was going, and by the end, the City team could say with (near) certainty that the case against us just hadn’t been made. Hence the obvious air of confidence transmitted ever since.
Click to expand...
Spot on. The whole thing is much more nuanced. The official statement will take months to write up. The decision may not have been communicated formally yet but both sides will have a strong inkling of the outcome and informal horse trading may already be happening.
 
If you ask an AI to check for comparative cases there are literally none in the sporting world, ever. The only comparisons outside sport relate to huge mafia trials FFS ! but these had numerous parties involved not 2. No single person, company or organisation have ever faced so many separate charges in the history of western Civ.
Lets say it takes the IC on average 2 - 3 days to deliberate, draft, review and formalise a finding, that's 130 charges x 3 = 390 working days. That's 1.5 years, excluding weekends but assuming continous Mon to Fri work, ie no hols, no diversions. That would indicate what Stefan is saying is true, there are NO findings known to anyone but the 3 (still tbc) panel members. I reckon it will drop next March 2026.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I'm not sure this idea that the PL leaks like a sieve holds much water any more. At least not since the existence of the APT case was leaked (by Arsenal we all suppose) in June last year was it? I always thought the PL had been through the wringer for that with the arbitration panel. I wouldn't he surprised if they are now water-tight.

Can anyone suggest any leaking by the PL or its member clubs since then?, Other than by City, strangely enough.

There was that Muhammed business a couple of months ago, but that was just stirring by the usual press suspects and was nothing new. I can't think of anything else.

Not saying there is anything conclusive in @Prestwich_Blue 's post but the lack of leaks can't be used to discredit it, imho, and the difficulty in keeping a recruitment confidential can't either because that was his personal conjecture, not what he had heard from his source.
Click to expand...
The leaks have certainly dried up. That said virtually all previous leaks came from the City-hating camp and were designed to damage us. I don’t think the PL or rival Directors would leak anything positive about City so no news is good news in my view.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Spot on. The whole thing is much more nuanced. The official statement will take months to write up. The decision may not have been communicated formally yet but both sides will have a strong inkling of the outcome and informal horse trading may already be happening.
Click to expand...
I have no legal knowledge, and I am in no way an ITK. However, I find it exceedingly difficult to imagine that the legal teams haven’t briefed the executives on both sides on how they believe the hearing went, and every step taken by the club after the hearing finished has been of the highest confidence. I'm not saying who's right or wrong, but I don't think it's impossible that the Premier League is in damage limitation mode, even if they haven’t yet had a written conclusion.
 
Kazzydeyna said:
I’m not an accountant and I’m not a lawyer, and I happily defer to both on matters such as these, but fwiw, I honestly believe we are still likely several months away from a published decision. Possibly another season at least.
The ramifications for whichever side loses this case are, frankly, seismic.
If we lose, the club is fucked for a couple of generations at least. And tainted until the end of time. The even-handed (ahem) media will see to that.
If the PL lose, the fall out will be less immediate, but long term just as nuclear. They will have been shown in a legal “court” (tribunal, whatever, but in front of three of the most learned legal minds in the country whatever you call it) to have systematically pursued one of their founding members, for years, and in full flow of the worlds media, over charges which did not stand up to scrutiny. And that would be unprecedented and could very well lead to a complete breakdown of the PL, and a legal minefield that would make the current situation look like a minor dispute between neighbours.

Whichever side loses is basically out of the game for good.
Therefore, I can’t not believe that this decision will take months to arrive at and having done so will then take many more months, or even years, to write up, in such a way that it is unimpeachable for either party to dispute.

Sorry to be negative about the timescales and they are only mine, with no legal experience, but I think we are all waiting for a decision that could very well be 12-24 months away.

I hope I’m wrong but I doubt I am.
Click to expand...
I agree with most of this post bar the seismic fallout. It will all go away quietly with innuendoes after 1/2 days.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
If you ask an AI to check for comparative cases there are literally none in the sporting world, ever. The only comparisons outside sport relate to huge mafia trials FFS ! but these had numerous parties involved not 2. No single person, company or organisation have ever faced so many separate charges in the history of western Civ.
Lets say it takes the IC on average 2 - 3 days to deliberate, draft, review and formalise a finding, that's 130 charges x 3 = 390 working days. That's 1.5 years, excluding weekends but assuming continous Mon to Fri work, ie no hols, no diversions. That would indicate what Stefan is saying is true, there are NO findings known to anyone but the 3 (still tbc) panel members. I reckon it will drop next March 2026.
Click to expand...
The main charges are repeated through the timescale, they all fall in a heap in the light of our audited accounts.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
The leaks have certainly dried up. That said virtually all previous leaks came from the City-hating camp and were designed to damage us. I don’t think the PL or rival Directors would leak anything positive about City so no news is good news in my view.
Click to expand...
Maybe Julie Slot* has been gagged?

(* Arsenal Chief Commercial Officer and wife of Times journalist Owen Slot)
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Maybe Julie Slot* has been gagged?

(* Arsenal Chief Commercial Officer and wife of Times journalist Owen Slot)
Click to expand...
I think that over the years the leaks have come from multiple sources including Arsenal, Spurs, and LFC. United have stopped since Ratcliffe came in, presumably because he has appointed Berrada and needs Middle East money for his stadium plans.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I think that over the years the leaks have come from multiple sources including Arsenal, Spurs, and LFC. United have stopped since Ratcliffe came in, presumably because he has appointed Berrada and needs Middle East money for his stadium plans.
Click to expand...

The PL and their favoured teams have been coordinating for years to systematically discredit any team that dares to try and rain on their parade, and they have pretty much failed at evert turn. What makes it even more delicious is the Rags have imploded.
 
ayrshire_blue said:
PB claims to have heard from a source that City have gained knowledge of the decision months ago and are colluding with the PL to keep schtum.

PB further speculates that (in his opinion) the most probable reason for the collusion/delay is so that they (PL) can appoint Masters' successor.

Stefan claims he's heard from multiple top top (or top top top?) sources on both sides that the decision is not yet known to either party and subsequently the theory that PB provides is therefore, nonsense.
Click to expand...
Now can you post your (excellent) summary of this entire thread! :-D
 
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