City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

StillBluessinceHydeRoad

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 Aug 2020
Messages
1,119
Team supported
City
That comment was directed at us, not the PL. He also made the very un-judge-like observation that we'd won the PL twice since the enquiry began which was unnecessarily pointed in my opinion.
That comment is pointed straight at the PL. His meaning appears quite clear - you have been enquiring into the affairs of a club for years now but in that time you have found no evidence of irregularities and have not even managed to come up with any charge at all while this club has had the time to win the PL title twice. How much longer do you intend to take before you accept that your regulations have not been broken? I don't see how a judge can tell City to resolve a case promptly when no case has been brought. But if you wish to accept the Daily Mail's view....
 

WRicko

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Jan 2016
Messages
1,633
That comment is pointed straight at the PL. His meaning appears quite clear - you have been enquiring into the affairs of a club for years now but in that time you have found no evidence of irregularities and have not even managed to come up with any charge at all while this club has had the time to win the PL title twice. How much longer do you intend to take before you accept that your regulations have not been broken? I don't see how a judge can tell City to resolve a case promptly when no case has been brought. But if you wish to accept the Daily Mail's view....
Are we any closer to knowing when it will finish or anything it feels like nothing is happening either way
 

bobbyowenquiff

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 Jan 2007
Messages
7,678
Location
Lancashire
That comment was directed at us, not the PL. He also made the very un-judge-like observation that we'd won the PL twice since the enquiry began which was unnecessarily pointed in my opinion.
I read the detailed comments and believe they were directed at both parties. I agree that the "we have won the PL twice" was a bit pointed. But the end of the day City's lawyers don't have to do anything. It is up to the PL to provide evidence first. There is no reason why we should co-operate with what is essentially a witchunt driven by our commercial rivals. I think the Judge's comments were also basically a "put up or shut up" message to the PL.
 

Newman Noggs

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 Dec 2009
Messages
8,898
Location
Gone fishin'
That comment is pointed straight at the PL. His meaning appears quite clear - you have been enquiring into the affairs of a club for years now but in that time you have found no evidence of irregularities and have not even managed to come up with any charge at all while this club has had the time to win the PL title twice. How much longer do you intend to take before you accept that your regulations have not been broken? I don't see how a judge can tell City to resolve a case promptly when no case has been brought. But if you wish to accept the Daily Mail's view....

What the fuck has the Daily Mail got to do with it ? I quoted the judge.
 

Kinkys Left Foot

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Sep 2008
Messages
3,721
Location
Audenshaw
Team supported
City
@Newman Noggs hope you don't mind me asking a few questions as projectriver doesn't seem to be about as our current legal advisor.
1. Is it likely the documentation they seek has already been the subject of scrutiny by CAS?
2. If not do they expect us to provide information indicating guilt of something we were proven not guilty of at CAS?
3. Is it matters in relation to accounts in excess of 6 years ago? If so is there a statute of limitation for these proposed allegations of rule infringement within the PL FFP rules? Is it not inferred by the Statute of Limitations?
4. As this is currently not a legal case alleging a breach of law, are we awaiting some lightning bolt of allegations of fraud against our auditors as surely that is the direction they are going with this?
 

Exeter Blue I am here

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,741
Location
Take a wild guess.......
Difference is they now know we’ll take them straight to an actual court.
That aside, the PL will be beginning to realise we are far too powerful now.
Yes, the red shirts will moan, but we are a key component of the product they sell now.

The only way they’ll charge us with anything is if it’s 110% irrefutable. As we are well run and aggressive in the boardroom now, they’ll go nowhere near us now. (in my option) Especially at the behest of the Red Shirts after some minor infractions or more like trumped up charges.
How are we going to take them to an actual Court when no appeal right exists? The PL are, in this instance, judge, jury and executioner. The one thing that fills me with any hope is that they’ve been ferreting through our accounts for years and (even allowing for the snail’s pace that legal wheels always turn at) yet still no charges have been forthcoming. However, beyond that, the rags and the dippers specifically endorsed Masters for his role, all of the other teams in the PL have long since been seduced by the non-stop drip feed of poison against us, the media will afford us no support whatsoever - indeed the complete opposite - the Super League threat will be used as leverage by the cartel clubs, and I fully expect charges to be levied against us, trumped up or otherwise, at some point. I just hope we can make the battle as bloody as possible if that happens. These are absolute fucking bastards we’re up against and this is their last chance to ruin us. Given the sums of money involved and the apparent absence of an independent appeals process, personally I think notions of them not charging us are wishful thinking
 
Last edited:

schfc6

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
6,628
How are we going to take them to an actual Court when no appeal right exists? The PL are, in this instance, judge, jury and executioner. The one thing that fills me with any hope is that they’ve been ferreting through our accounts for years and (even allowing for the snail’s pace that legal wheels always turn at) yet still no charges have been forthcoming. However, beyond that, the rags and the dippers specifically endorsed Masters for his role, all of the other teams in the PL have long since been seduced by the non-stop drip feed of poison against us, the media will afford us no support whatsoever - indeed the complete opposite - the Super League threat will be used as leverage by the cartel clubs, and I fully expect charges to be levied against us, trumped up or otherwise. I just hope we can make the battle as bloody as possible. They’re fucking bastards and this is their last chance to ruin us. Given the sums of money involved, personally I think notions of them not charging us are wishful thinking


I’m not 100% sure, but I’d guess that any decision taken by the PL that would effect our earnings or potential earnings would be a civil matter. And civil charges would then be brought against the PL especially if they acted outside of the law.
 

Centurions

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Sep 2012
Messages
16,572
Location
Behind Blue Eyes
I read the detailed comments and believe they were directed at both parties. I agree that the "we have won the PL twice" was a bit pointed. But the end of the day City's lawyers don't have to do anything. It is up to the PL to provide evidence first. There is no reason why we should co-operate with what is essentially a witchunt driven by our commercial rivals. I think the Judge's comments were also basically a "put up or shut up" message to the PL.
I think you're wrong there. City are objecting that the PL just want to go fishing and they have no right to do so and are exceeding their remit. I think the comments by the judge are aimed fairly & squarely at the PL, not us.
 

StillBluessinceHydeRoad

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 Aug 2020
Messages
1,119
Team supported
City
What the fuck has the Daily Mail got to do with it ? I quoted the judge.
You quoted the judge and then you interpreted the judge's words. The interpretation that you put on the judge's words is one which originated in those media outlets which had rushed to declare that City were guilty as charged by UEFA and that we had "got off" on "a technicality" by delaying the enquiry. They rushed to point out that City had frustrated the PL by the same delaying tactics and one of the most prominent was the Mail I do find it strange that so many City supporters still accept the nonsense purveyed by the Mail as at all authoritative .

There are some other puzzling aspects to your post. You assert that "we can't argue that ... because we delayed the enquiry going to court". Enquiries do NOT go to court. Charges are heard by a court and the PL had demanded to see evidence without specifying what they might be evidence of. The judge's comments betray an irritable impatience with the PL which has taken - in football terms - an inordinate time on an enquiry which has led to neither an acquittal nor a charge. It has still to arrive at any outcome. But it isn't City who are carrying out the enquiry and there is no reason why on earth the judge should, therefore, tell the club to bring the PL's enquiry to a speedy conclusion.
 

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.