PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Shads said:
I get it. However if it is going to be the only thing they get us on then it does become important. The fundamental difference is that at CAS we admitted that we did not cooperate as we did not trust the process. The narrative has changed here. We have always stated that we cooperated fully with the PL investigation and provided everything relevant. It is a much better position to defend than an admission of guilt…
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it is.

Uefa asked us for information. We gave it to them. Then we stopped, because we determined they were leaking it. They hit us with a charge of non cooperation. Cas agreed with them, but reduced the amount because it recognised the club's position.

The PL asked us for information. We gave it to them. Then we stopped, becsuse we determined they didnt need any more or anything from that period. They hit us with a charge of non cooperation.

What's the difference? we publicly stated the reason for not giving uefa evidence (or admitted it as you say) where as we didnt for the PL.
 
From my MP, looks like they already decided to act:


Thank you for your email.

I agree that football governance must keep evolving if it is to keep pace with the challenges of the modern game. The global commercial attractiveness of English football is something to be celebrated, but not at the expense of supporters and their communities.

I welcomed the publication of the independent Fan Led Review of Football Governance. I understand that the report was based on over 100 hours of engagement with Supporters’ Trusts, fan groups, women’s football representatives, football authorities, club owners, players representatives, and underrepresented groups, alongside over 20,000 fans responding to an online survey. I would like to extend my gratitude to the former Sports Minister, Tracey Crouch MP, for compiling this report which serves as a thorough and detailed examination of the challenges faced by English football. It is a demonstration of the financial problems being caused by incentives within the game and reckless decision making by some clubs and owners, both of which are unsustainable and threaten the future of the game. It is clear that current oversight of the game is not up to the challenge of solving the structural challenges and action must be taken.

I am encouraged that the Government confirmed in its response to the Review that it is committed to reforming football governance to enable a long-term, sustainable future for the game. Accepting or supporting all of the strategic recommendations within the Review will represent a wholesale change in the way football is governed in England. In particular, I welcome the decision to establish a new independent regulator for football. I understand the regulator will have a focus on financial regulation. The financial regulation regime will take a holistic approach, bringing together the Owners’ and Directors’ Test, corporate governance and equality, diversity and inclusion as part of one regime.

I look forward to reading the proposals in further detail when the Government publishes its White Paper in due course. I support these reforms which I feel will set a new and better strategic direction for football.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Kind Regards,

mail
Chris Clarkson MP
Member of Parliament for Heywood & Middleton
Website: www.chrisclarkson.org.uk
Constituency Office Telephone: 01706 538262
 
Absolutely superb from Pep today. Spoke for us all today - we need to speak for him on Sunday. Loud and proud.
“We’ve got Guardiola”
“We love you City we do”
“Stand up for the Champions”
“One Paul Dickov”
“Sha-la-la…Summerbee”
All game. Very ******* loud and very ******* proud!!!!
 
Coatigan said:
I'm not sure it is.

Uefa asked us for information. We gave it to them. Then we stopped, because we determined they were leaking it. They hit us with a charge of non cooperation. Cas agreed with them, but reduced the amount because it recognised the club's position.

The PL asked us for information. We gave it them. Then we stopped, necause we determined theyndidnt need any more or anything from that period. They hit us with a charge of non cooperation. What's the difference? we publiclynstated the reason for not giving uefa evidence (or admitted it as you say) where as we didnt for the PL.
Click to expand...
That in itself is the difference. CAS had to fine us for non cooperation as we admitted that we had not cooperated. There were no submissions about “if” we failed to cooperate only a plea in mitigation as to “why”. They reduced the fine by 2/3 but could not wipe it out. Here we have the chance to argue that we cooperated fully and provided everything relevant and appropriate that was asked for. We can also argue that it is not a failure to cooperate in failing to provide documents that were akin to a fishing expedition. We never had that line of argument available to us previously as we had admitted fault.
 
Brendan110_0 said:
From my MP, looks like they already decided to act:


Thank you for your email.

I agree that football governance must keep evolving if it is to keep pace with the challenges of the modern game. The global commercial attractiveness of English football is something to be celebrated, but not at the expense of supporters and their communities.

I welcomed the publication of the independent Fan Led Review of Football Governance. I understand that the report was based on over 100 hours of engagement with Supporters’ Trusts, fan groups, women’s football representatives, football authorities, club owners, players representatives, and underrepresented groups, alongside over 20,000 fans responding to an online survey. I would like to extend my gratitude to the former Sports Minister, Tracey Crouch MP, for compiling this report which serves as a thorough and detailed examination of the challenges faced by English football. It is a demonstration of the financial problems being caused by incentives within the game and reckless decision making by some clubs and owners, both of which are unsustainable and threaten the future of the game. It is clear that current oversight of the game is not up to the challenge of solving the structural challenges and action must be taken.

I am encouraged that the Government confirmed in its response to the Review that it is committed to reforming football governance to enable a long-term, sustainable future for the game. Accepting or supporting all of the strategic recommendations within the Review will represent a wholesale change in the way football is governed in England. In particular, I welcome the decision to establish a new independent regulator for football. I understand the regulator will have a focus on financial regulation. The financial regulation regime will take a holistic approach, bringing together the Owners’ and Directors’ Test, corporate governance and equality, diversity and inclusion as part of one regime.

I look forward to reading the proposals in further detail when the Government publishes its White Paper in due course. I support these reforms which I feel will set a new and better strategic direction for football.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Kind Regards,

mail
Chris Clarkson MP
Member of Parliament for Heywood & Middleton
Website: www.chrisclarkson.org.uk
Constituency Office Telephone: 01706 538262
Click to expand...
If there's a photo opportunity or some way to improve his own position, then Chris Clarkson (CCIAC btw) will be all over it.
 
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
✖
  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.