PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Tim of the Oak]

If City have indeed fail to supply everything the thePL requests and they ( unlike UEFA) can produce evidence that despite repeated requests to provide such requests haven’t been met in full then I think it’s inevitable that the tribunal will make damaging assumptions as to what those documents reveal .
Even if they don’t!
Then at the inevitable appeal” that forum ( unlike CAS where UEFAs assumptions were dismissed because in effect UEFA gave up trying to get the info) I would imagine the PL s attempts to gain full disclosure added to the High Courts ruling and the hint given by CAS in this regard that failure to fully disclose any defence re non cooperation won’t go well

Do we really know what documents we did / didn’t supply before CAS. We supplied enough information to put the emails stolen by Pinto into context. We refused to cooperate with the UEFA inquiry for reasons including passed chairmen of Liverpool and Man U were involved in the initial prosecution. We didn’t cooperate with UEFA so some procedural fine could be justified.

There are additional reasons why we would not comply with the Premier League:
- the Prem reinforced it’s willingness to use stolen information in its rules.
- the Prem (although not bound by a higher legal authority / CAS) chose to ignore the ruling of CAS - that’s at least partly unreasonable.
- the Prem continued to display double standards towards who it admits to its Club. For example, there was extreme scrutiny towards the Saudis taking over Newcastle (maybe justified) and a tick box exercise for American owners like the ones who took over at Burnley.
- Nine (then)! Prem Clubs wrote to UEFA To try to influence our ban from the Champs League.
- Everyone at the Prem from the Chairwoman to the Head of League Compliance seems to be a rag or a supporter of another rival club.

It was never a case of being able to “give a dog a bone” by cooperating fully with the Premier League investigation.

 

[terraloon]

Is it true that the dippers hacking was deemed ‘time barred’ by the same organisation that says our alleged discrepancies cannot be?

That is just not correct

1) It was an FA Investigation not the PL
2) The two clubs had reached a private settlement and it was the date of that settlement and the timing of the subsequent investigation that created the issue.

Irrespective I don’t think that City actually ever made a compl to the governing bodies.

 

[remember arthur mann]

I don't think we can accept any "pinch" this time. We need to stand up for ourselves we've tried playing the nice guy and now it's time to end this once and for all, if that means dragging the PL or rivals clubs through the courts for years so be it. Enough is enough.

 

[M18CTID]

This is the part you were looking for

View attachment 69094

Cheers for that. So Ernst & Young ran the check. That's more than good enough for me because if what was alleged actually happened then the auditors would've been in on it as well so by extension it could be argued Ernst & Young are effectively being accused of accountancy fraud too. With that in mind, and assuming that nothing else has come to light in the meantime, I'm not sure why the PL would even want to revisit this and any other charges where we won at CAS!

 

[SilverFox2]

I read today that Lord Pannick is an Arsenal supporter. I fully expect him to give his all for us regardless.

II think our owner is a Real Madrid supporter.

 

[waspish]

Unless we do a deal this will take 3/4 years!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I'd just like to ask one quick question of #Prestwich_Blue please. I watched your interview with Cheesy and have read your informative message a couple of pages back. You address the materiality of both the Mancini scenario and that of the player payments. I agree that neither of these are likely to be significant enough to result in extreme sanctions but you don't make comment on the "sponsorship stuff." I just wondered why that was. In terms of materiality, Mancini is golf ball size, player payments is tennis ball size but the sponsorship is potentially beach ball size. Why have you not addressed the beach ball. I know we have little detail but are you confident the sponsorship stuff is not a threat (can you pop the beach ball?). I ask simply because it is only the sponsorship stuff that really worries me. Thankyou

The Etihad stuff was covered at CAS and was cleared. They, not ADUG, were found to have paid the sponsorship, that it was fair value and that they got fair value in return. Two others were Aabar and Etisalat but I think those two were time-barred. Aabar would have been similar to Etihad so not worried about that. Etisalat was an odd one as ADUG advanced the monies for that one, but that was before FFP if I remember correctly. Once FFP came in, they reimbursed ADUG. It was in the CAS verdict that UEFA were aware of that and accepted it.

This is an example of how weak the PL charges really are.

And if you want to tag anyone, use @ not #

 

[Iassel]

One thing that I think is important to repeat for expectation management at least is that a ‘100% win’ for City is extremely unlikely.

The non-cooperation charges are highly likely to be supported by specific requests from the PL to City that could be proven unfulfilled, and so a large fine is in my opinion nailed on.

Let’s be clear though, if the rest of the charges fall ‘non-proven’, City will be hosting the largest party Abu Dhabi has ever seen, and Pep will be puffing one of his Cubana’s in his ‘technical area’….

The key for expectation management though is that City almost certainly *will* fall foul of the small fry charges, and opposition supporters *will* hang on this, as with CAS, to support their view that City were guilty all along.

 

[M18CTID]

Arsene has been talking up the allegations constantly until now. Any comment like this one is welcomed, but why the change of heart, and if he knows Khaldoon so well as he says why has it taken til now to make this u-turn?

I've not come across anything from Wenger where he has talked up the allegations - have you got any links?

What I will say to those who are suspicious of these comments is that about a year or so ago he was on beIN Sports one evening and that wanker Keys was asking him why City didn't just go and cough up the £150 million or whatever it was that Levy was asking for Kane. Keys must've thought that Wenger would make some negative comment about City - as he often did so when he was Arsenal manager - but instead Wenger said that City are a very well run club these days and although we spend lots of money, we also have a limit to what we can go to when we're bidding for a player.

 

[Dubai Blue]

The most logical and simple reasoning is far less difficult to process. Biggest TV & Prize revenue = highest commercial revenues in every other league…

It's almost like united's massive commercial growth during their extended period of success never really happened. It's beyond mental that people keep trotting this shit out. Commercial growth has followed serial winners around since sport began.