PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[pardoeofftomexico]

Because the court ordered them to be published. Tbf, the PL wanted them kept out of the press.
(am I right here or misremembering?)

Certainly when the PL attempted to appoint arbitrators and City felt they would be biased against us, both City and the PL wanted evrything to be held in private. We took a case against the PL and when dismissed we went to the Court of Appeal. The judges did not upheld our complaint but went against both us and the PL and said the action could be reported as it was of general interest. So this latest action has been stated but I guess that both sides again want privacy so we are not likely to hear anything until it is all resolved.

 

[Len Rum]

My belief is this is pretty well about Fordham and Mancini's Al Jazira contract. The latter is immaterial and at the very worst, even assuming it's not time-barred, might result in a fine if the independent commission feel it's out of order.

Fordham is more difficult to call. They were originally Manchester City Football Club (Image Rights) and a club subsidiary. The were incorporated in May 2012 and appear to have stopped trading in 2018. They're currently being liquidated. Our wage vill shot up in 2019, from £260m to £315m, which while not absolutely conclusive, suggests that we started paying image rights via Manchester City Football Club then. Or it could be related to bringing one of the other subsidiaries (Manchester City Football Services) back into the main accounts.

Whatever the legalities of Fordham, we must have taken expert advice and there was a clear trail from Manchester City Football Club (Image Rights) to Fordham Sports Image Rights. Our auditors must have been aware of this and presumably would have asked the relevant questions. Assuming they did, had they not been happy they'd have walked away and/or qualified the accounts. They didn't so we must presume they were happy with the answers given.

Also, the Fordham situation was revealed by Der Spiegel iirc, or was publicised somewhere else, so it's hardly been a secret.

So is the issue that the image right payments were shown in the wrong section of the accounts or not at all?

 

[KS55]

She's a thick fucker. There are only two legal verdicts I'm aware of - innocent and guilty. If we weren't guilty then by a process of elimination it's the other one.

Pep was speaking colloquially. These are allegations of breaking a regulation.There are two “verdicts” that CAS could have come to: Proved and Not proved.
In criminal cases the possible verdicts in England are: Guilty and Not guilty. Innocent is not used.

 

[pardoeofftomexico]

So is the issue that the image right payments were shown in the wrong section of the accounts or not at all?

My recollection was that there was a sale of image rights that would have been shown in the accounts but it was alleged that the company buying the rights did not do anything with them. No idea if that was correct.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Pep was speaking colloquially. These are allegations of breaking a regulation.There are two “verdicts” that CAS could have come to: Proved and Not proved.
In criminal cases the possible verdicts in England are: Guilty and Not guilty. Innocent is not used.

Fair enough - I'm happy with not guilty

 

[Jordie]

He said our titles would be tainted if we are found guilty.

Not the time to be coming out with shit like that. Plays right into the hands of the cunts in the media and worst of all people will think he speaks for all our fans when he talks because of his position.

Stupid stupid comment from the bloke.

Cheers bud.

 

[birchwoodgingerste]

"peps comments may be libellous" was one article I seen!

 

[flb]

Any of the gambling sites giving odds on a banner flying behind a plane tomorrow?

We should commission our own , simply saying
THE PL IS CORRUPT!
Be a fantastic sight wouldn’t it ! But they’d probably blame the club and not the fans.

 

[Bazzmand Show]

Why couldn't these charges have been served privately and City given the opportunity to respond, for them to be investigated, heard and findings/conclusions made at which point then they go public?

Because there was pressure from outside to make them public.

 

[KS55]

Certainly when the PL attempted to appoint arbitrators and City felt they would be biased against us, both City and the PL wanted evrything to be held in private. We took a case against the PL and when dismissed we went to the Court of Appeal. The judges did not upheld our complaint but went against both us and the PL and said the action could be reported as it was of general interest. So this latest action has been stated but I guess that both sides again want privacy so we are not likely to hear anything until it is all resolved.

yes he i....haha

Panto season has finished .