PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[chickaroon]

I think Leterme sort of hints that they’ve been speaking with the PL about their investigation. He said the PL’s evidence is a lot more solid, or something along those lines.

He did say, something along those lines.

 

[blueyorkie]

Seeing as the CAS panel voted 4-3 in our favour we could be in deep trouble. I hope I’m wrong, but I just can’t see anything but a guilty verdict.

It was never stated that the panel found in such a way, however my recollection was that there were only 3 members of the panel. I will check though.

 

[Chris in London]

Is there any truth in the rumour that this independent panel are empowered to make judgements on the balance of probability, rather than the higher standard of beyond reasonable doubt?

I'm 20 pages behind so someone else may have answered this already.

The answer is Yes, the issue will be decided on the balance of probabilities, just as the CAS case was.

However.

There is a basic principle that while the standard of proof does not change, the cogency of the evidence necessary to establish that augments according to the seriousness of the allegations. Take an allegation that the local authority makes against a parent it claims has physically abused a child. It is inherently less probable that a parent has deliberately broken a bone than it is that they have slapped a child. So while the standard of proof is the same either way, the quality of the evidence you need to show, on the balance of probability, that the parent broke the child’s bone deliberately is significantly higher than the quality of the evidence you need to show that the child was slapped.

Likewise in this case. What is alleged is there has been a serious, co-ordinated and sustained attempt to defraud our auditors, the premier league, UEFA and others over a period of a decade. Those are very serious allegations, and so the evidence needed to make them out has a different quality to the evidence needed to make out a much less serious accusation. So the evidence needed to establish, even on the balance of probabilities, very serious allegations must be very cogent otherwise the panel can’t be satisfied, even to that standard, simply because the allegations are so serious.

The accusations made against the club are very, very serious.

That being the case, the question the panel will ask itself is this: does the evidence satisfy us, on the balance of probabilities, that the particular charge brought by the Premier League is true? If the evidence lacks the cogency necessary to show we have committed serious breaches of not just PL rules but (as Petrusha has convincingly demonstrated) English criminal law then the charges will fail.

Which is precisely what I expect to happen.

 

[Withnail]

The law may be an ass, but it also trumps everything else.

Much as we all would love a moment on the court steps and Khaldoon shouting we are now going to bury people, the notion is fanciful.

Pep has already said it, the slurs and damage to our reputation is already done, how do we truly get that back.

We don't.

City are confident in our legal counsel and position, that will do for me. The bar is incredibly high for essentially sending our Club in to extinction and pariah status.

We clear our name in Court, not in the court of Public opinion. We will likely have to take a gulp of some form of medicine, but we shouldn't care about that if it doesn't kill us.

Whatever the outcome, rival fans will always consider City as cheats and in their eyes there will be permanent asterisks against the trophies we have won. I would prefer this not to be the case but as you say TH the most important thing to come out of this is that City win this case. Unfortunately, our reputation is tarnished forever in most of the media and rivals fans eyes.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Just to be clear, Rui Pinto didn't give this information to UEFA or the PL, he gave it to a European group of investigative reporters (I think after he was being investigated for hacking) which is where Der Spiegel got their information (I think that's the right way around). Both UEFA and the PL only had access to the online media reproductions of them, exactly the same way any of us have seen them. CAS only accepted them because we (eventually) supplied the originals.

That itself is a bit mad.

I don't see it that way. I believe the Premier League have had their hand forced by lobbying and also by us, in terms of our non cooperation.

We are guilty of that and I can only presume we are happy to take the pinch on that, as long as we get to defend ourselves on our terms.

I also don't see City looking for damages in any win for us, as the public narrative will be put to bed once and for all, with a power dynamic away from the red shirts and cementing our place the top table.

I don't care about perception, I care about City continuing to exist, that's the only win that matters right now.

Those haters will continue to hate us, regardless of a positive outcome for us.

I think all of this will be pretty much how it all pans out. I think it’s clear that City have been keeping their evidence back and letting the prem graft to get all their evidence together despite not knowing what we’re going to turn up with.

To simplify it, I think our aim is to embarrass them by providing all of the information that was previously time barred, effectively killing any theory that we got off with an technicality. City want this over with.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is what City’s strategy is. We take the fine for failing to cooperate, but we’ve finally put any accusations of cheating to bed. It would also explain to the footballing world why we didn’t want to cooperate with two of footballs biggest organisation, they both had motives.

We wouldn’t need to claim for damages, nor would I want City too. We’d effectively be beating UEFA once again while also exposing the PL.

Everything I said could be a fantasy, but I do believe that we’re on the right track.

 

[David Kloppesh]

The law may be an ass, but it also trumps everything else.

Much as we all would love a moment on the court steps and Khaldoon shouting we are now going to bury people, the notion is fanciful.

Pep has already said it, the slurs and damage to our reputation is already done, how do we truly get that back.

We don't.

City are confident in our legal counsel and position, that will do for me. The bar is incredibly high for essentially sending our Club in to extinction and pariah status.

We clear our name in Court, not in the court of Public opinion. We will likely have to take a gulp of some form of medicine, but we shouldn't care about that if it doesn't kill us.

They are lying about City cause they're scared of City. I'll take that. It's ok to be scared.

 

[Big Dave Watson]

It's about picking our battles.

We still have to exist in the Premier League eco-system.

Better to have won the day and cleared our name in a legal setting, than the hyperbole of Talk Sport and Daily Mail.

If we clear our name, nobody in the media would dare trot out the accusations again, certainly not at the expense of a serious lawsuit.

We win in the judicial hearing, we win on and off the pitch in so many ways.

City essentially become bullet proof.

That's worth any point scoring seeking redress from a Premier League that is still ran like a cartel.

The independent regulator is our bonus outcome.

Totally agree with all of that but being pedantic haven’t we been here before about people not daring to trot out the accusations again? See recent examples of Harris before the match yesterday and that witless scouse woman recently?

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

Whatever the outcome, rival fans will always consider City as cheats and in their eyes there will be permanent asterisks against the trophies we have won. I would prefer this not to be the case but as you say TH the most important thing to come out of this is that City win this case. Unfortunately, our reputation is tarnished forever in most of the media and rivals fans eyes.

I dont agree, most people I have spoken believe this is a witch-hunt, they can see what other clubs have got away with. Chelsea are prime example, £1.5B written off then another £600m spent since the summer. Even the most tribal supporter can see that. Even looking at the comments on the Guardian for the weekend games and very few are calling City cheats, the CAS verdict has made people think twice.

 

[domalino]

Its far from as simple as that.

The PL initiated an arbitration panel to decide, if you like re documents and disclosure and City I believe challenged the PLs jurisdiction and the impartiality of any panel. The HC ruling went against City in effect re enforcing the contractual obligations of city to cooperate.

What documents/explanations do we have from the high court case?

 

[Inter Me Nan]

Whatever the outcome, rival fans will always consider City as cheats and in their eyes there will be permanent asterisks against the trophies we have won. I would prefer this not to be the case but as you say TH the most important thing to come out of this is that City win this case. Unfortunately, our reputation is tarnished forever in most of the media and rivals fans eyes.

If we get off I will not give a single fuck what any rival fan thinks.