City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

[Colin Bells Boots]

Move on you say…. I guess we should but the PL and the Red cartel won’t be moving on… they won’t settle until City are out of business.

They can't keep using illegal rules without getting seriously damaged.

We have started now and I don't believe that we will let things rest with the PL trying to roll on with illegal compromises .

 

[give it to gordon]

Do you really want the PL to have the power to retrospectively punish clubs? We’d be the number one target for some bullshit change that they could then charge us with.

It’s common sense not to punish clubs retrospectively as they’d argue they wouldn’t have done what they did if the rules were different from the get go.

Aren't City being charged with retrospectively ? Going back to 2018 ?

 

[Gone for a Burton]

One we do not have any shareholder loans or any issues. However you missing my point. I am not saying they should apply retrospectively or punish retrospectively I am saying there is no sense in applying it retrospectively and not punishing as your in affect saying you broke the rules but it doesn’t matter. Better to just say you didn’t break the rules

Better to say you and the PL DID break the rules and that interest and sanctions would ordinarily apply.

However, Manchester City have proposed that,as long as the compound interest is paid (say over 3 years) and all the facts are recorded as matters of historical fact in public documents, no additional sanctions will apply.

Substantial repayments for the borrowers, adverse exposure for the PL, accurate records for future clarity and excellent PR for City.

If all that fails, all cards off the table City and hell mend em all !!

CTID.

 

[WRicko]

Better to say you and the PL DID break the rules and that interest and sanctions would ordinarily apply.

However, Manchester City have proposed that,as long as the compound interest is paid (say over 3 years) and all the facts are recorded as matters of historical fact in public documents, no additional sanctions will apply.

Substantial repayments for the borrowers, adverse exposure for the PL, accurate records for future clarity and excellent PR for City.

If all that fails, all cards off the table City and hell mend em all !!

CTID.

Is this your hypothetical scenario or something that’s actually being suggested

 

[WRicko]

You could say the rules were broken but interest on shareholder loans is a mitigating factor.

But then you’re looking at retrospective action for not breaking some rules but breaking other rules because the rules were illegally drafted and you didn’t know you had broken the rules so getting mitigation but not full exemption. That seems harsh

 

[WRicko]

What I should have explained was that you'd take it into account on future assessments, which are done on a rolling 3-year basis, but not on any assessment where all 3 years were in the past. So if the new rules apply from 2025/26, you could include revised accounts from 2023/24 and 2024/25.

I wouldn’t call that retrospective just call it applying to existing loans going forward but ok

 

[KS55]

Aren't City being charged with retrospectively ? Going back to 2018 ?

No. We are charged with breaking rules in force at the time. Historic infractions are not retrospective.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Is this your hypothetical scenario or something that’s actually being suggested

Both.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Which no one has as they were/are the rules as of this moment in time. There's not a scooby's chance of any retrospective punishment nor of having the (non-existent) interest taken into account retrospectively, no matter how much we may find it funny. Can we (not aimed at yourself) not all move on from this nonsense.

Don't be patronising, it's unnecessary.

Posters can hold a view and make suggestions, even if they are ultimately proven to be wrong....its a forum.

I don't believe that the PL will insist on retrospective interest payments due to their ATPs being largely unlawful.

But why not ?

A number of clubs have benefited from loans, to the extent that several may otherwise have failed the PSR and been sanctioned.

Rather than wiping the slate clean, let the benefiting clubs pay the interest then take action against the PL for professional negligence.

The PLs ATPs were unlawful, but the clubs gained commercial and, possible,sporting benefit.

Focus hard on the fundamental facts of the matter and remove all the deliberate obfuscation !!

Finally, in a hypothetical case.

If City had an interest free loan from HH Sheikh Mansour that was (say) five times the size of Arsenal's (£1Billion), and it created a commercial and/ or sporting advantage to City, do you believe that the PL would have viewed matters differently..... and that Arsenal would've remained silent ?

This matter now presents the opportunity to drain the swamp ...

"Once and for all"

Khaldoon al Mubarak
Chairman
Manchester City FC.

 

[terraloon]

I dont know, but its an intriguing question.

From memory Arsenal included comment in their accounts stating that they had to include in their FFP calculations a sum ( not actually make a payment) in respect of advantageous interest rates that KSE were able to borrow money at on behalf of AFC
In other words the owners facilitated a better rate than Arsenal could achieve if it were the club that were borrowing the money so it was treated as an associated party or whatever term transaction