PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[wolviedinho]

Man City 'launched secret project to shift player image rights cash'

Manchester City are alleged to have launched a secret project to shift the cost of player image rights to a third-party in a bid to escape Financial Fair Play penalties.

www.dailymail.co.uk

of course it was here's an article asking UEFA to investigate it way before we were charged by them. It was covered and deemed nothing

“We will need to fight this [FFP regulations] and do it in a way that is not visible, or we will be pointed out as the global enemies of football.”

That worked out well. Prophecy came through it seems.

 

[wolviedinho]

Cross of St Marks looked a bit Nazi Germany haha. How's this?
View attachment 69187

Where can I get one of these? Thanks

 

[dario2739]

Man City 'launched secret project to shift player image rights cash'

Manchester City are alleged to have launched a secret project to shift the cost of player image rights to a third-party in a bid to escape Financial Fair Play penalties.

www.dailymail.co.uk

of course it was here's an article asking UEFA to investigate it way before we were charged by them. It was covered and deemed nothing

PrestwichBlue covered the Fordham thing - the information is readily available on Companies House... what is there to investigate, City haven't hidden it... it's literally in the public domain.
If anything was done wrong then the PL's own auditors haven't seen it, nor did they see any problems with our accounts... which leads me to conclude that if the PLs checks on Club finance are as lax as it's being claimed, then they need to go over EVERY CLUB's finances again.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

It was not covered in the CAS trial FFS.

We all know it was uncovered before then, that's what we've been discussing for the last 10 pages.

It was not covered by, or even mentioned, at CAS.

Are you saying uefa didn't bother investigating one of the most controversial accounting queries brought to them. I'm not buying that whatsoever. Uefa either investigated and deemed it fine or brought it to CAS and it was thrown out. CAS only mentioned that we hadn't falsified accounts not the actual details involved in it's decision. So for me this is a nothing story and we have irrefutable evidence about the player images rights.

 

[Kazzydeyna]

I can’t believe we have City fans in this thread now, arguing furiously with other City fans, that our club is, actually, guilty of some sort of transgression, to the point of basically wishing it so.

I prefer to trust the words of our executive team, that they have irrefutable evidence of our innocence, and are looking forward to the opportunity to prove it “once and for all”.
And I’ll keep that trust until such time as evidence is presented that renders it invalid. Or, in other words, until hell freezes over.

 

[Machiavelli]

Cross of St Marks looked a bit Nazi Germany haha. How's this?
View attachment 69187

Shouldn’t it say RELEGATION







;-)

 

[domalino]

CAS only mentioned that we hadn't falsified accounts not the actual details involved in it's decision.

I have been fairly frustrated by how uninformed opposition fans are about the CAS case and the charges against City in general, but when we have our own fans so confidently spouting blatantly false stuff like this I obviously am being too harsh on the rest.

 

[domalino]

I can’t believe we have City fans in this thread now, arguing furiously with other City fans, that our club is, actually, guilty of some sort of transgression, to the point of basically wishing it so.

I prefer to trust the words of our executive team, that they have irrefutable evidence of our innocence, and are looking forward to the opportunity to prove it “once and for all”.
And I’ll keep that trust until such time as evidence is presented that renders it invalid. Or, in other words, until hell freezes over.

I've read pretty much every post in the last 25 pages and haven't seen any City fans arguing furiously that the club is guilty or wishing it so.

I've seen people who's interest in the case extends beyond "club says we're fine so wake me up when the not guilty verdict comes in" and who actually want to look at the details of the accusations and evidence in the public domain discuss the investigation, but perhaps you can't tell the difference.

 

[Dribble]

That would have been the argument used by our lawyers. The PL can't go looking for a case to pursue. They have to have one when they ask for documents, emails, etc.

I could be wrong but it looks increasingly like all they had was UEFA's sloppy seconds.

You're quite correct. If A accuses B, A has to present their evidence to support the accusation & give B the opportunity to offer a defence & supporting counter evidence.

What you can't do is accuse someone of wrongdoing with zero evidence & challenge them to disprove the claim, or ask for evidence to prove the claim.

You make the claim, you provide your evidence & the other side can either accept the claim in whole or part & provide whatever necessary supporting evidence.

This is why the only long-term solution is an independent regulator & the scrapping of FFP & the fair workable revision of football finances & debt management.

 

[cheekybids]

Sorry - had a hell of a few days!!!! Here's Che Guardiola
View attachment 69165View attachment 69166

Brilliant, the only issue is the beret looks a bit square, a bit more Asian dictator than freedom fighter.

Not sure if that’s down to long flowing locks versus bald head. No idea how you do it but well done.