115 Charges - FAQs

[BamberBridgeBlue]

In the event of the club being found guilty of some or all of the charges, a points reduction or expulsion only punishes the coaches, employees, players and fans. Considering the charges mostly relate to historical issues, this is a dangerous precedent. I know Everton and Forest were penalised last season but they stayed in the Premier League. Is there any precedent for fans to mount a legal compensation if we end up relegated and losing our best players?

Breached Premier League rules. Not found guilty of charges. THIS IS NOT A CROWN PROSECUTION. Don’t use the media’s nonsense language.

 

[BolinCell]

The judgement related to sponsorship should be interesting. What I can't get my head around is this, what are the fair and proper total's paid for sponsorship based on ?. Is it how much Man Utd or Liverpool received for there sponsorship deals, because sponsor's like to be associated with winners, and to that end City would have the biggest sponsorship deals at this moment in time. So for many years City's sponsors have been getting a bargain if our deals are less than the unsuccessful red rabble who can't even make the CL. As for related sponsorship who on earth came up with that idea? oh yeah I wonder. Red Bull Salzburg must be quaking in their boots hoping it doesn't take off on the continent.

 

[I'm no cynic but...]

Someone with a better memory of events would possibly explain what happened a few years back when some office administrator plus three or four of his backroom staff left our offices and went in a group at Liverpool.
Shortly after that we had the Rui Pinto hacking sensation which relied on hacked and edited emails being supplied to UEFA which in turn led to charges against us from that organisation (wrong word for UEFA) and us going to CAS to clear ourselves.
About this time there was the small matter of City receiving around £1m from Liverpool but there was no disclosure as to the reason for this money being paid into our accounts.
Some on Bluemoon speculated that this was a bribe to City as the new Liverpool staff had passwords into the City computer system. The same Bluemoon voices were sure that the source of the Pinto hacked emails came from those new Liverpool staff who may well have transferred their allegiances for grudge reasons.
I've no reason to believe that this be true or not but...as we are on the end of 115 monetary charges then I am to assume that this ambiguous million pound transaction should be examined as one of the 115 and not be passed over to allow one of our accusers to escape examination into their own secret workings.
If we are to go down fighting then it is right that we take the others with us.

 

[salfordbluetrue]

The judgement related to sponsorship should be interesting. What I can't get my head around is this, what are the fair and proper total's paid for sponsorship based on ?. Is it how much Man Utd or Liverpool received for there sponsorship deals, because sponsor's like to be associated with winners, and to that end City would have the biggest sponsorship deals at this moment in time. So for many years City's sponsors have been getting a bargain if our deals are less than the unsuccessful red rabble who can't even make the CL. As for related sponsorship who on earth came up with that idea? oh yeah I wonder. Red Bull Salzburg must be quaking in their boots hoping it doesn't take off on the continent.

Now my memory is not good but, When City had a massive hike in their sponsorship deal, they raised it to just under the Arsenal deal, City had just taken off them their CL spot, they also asked the PL if this was okay, obviously they could not say no.

 

[Asa's left peg]

It's one of the things I don't understand. Every deal is supposed to be assessed for FMV when it's done. Surely it's the PL's fault if they now have an issue with their own valuations.