PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Chris in London]

I hope I'm not being excessively hubristic here but my view is that the charges, while potentially serious in theory, are actually thin.

The image rights stuff (which was the one I was originally most concerned about) was being discussed with us, by UEFA, in 2015. I can't imagine it wasn't also known to the PL therefore, who were the FFP licensor. If UEFA felt we were trying to defraud them (in the criminal sense) then they'd have charged us back in 2018. They didn't though.

With Mancini's contract, that was around 1% of our 2010-11 revenue and about 0.75% of our 2012 revenue. It's hardly Enron levels.

CAS has already ruled that our Etihad sponsorship (a) was broadly fair value and (b) not funded by ADUG, but by the Abu Dhabi government. So I can't see them having much luck with Aabar, that might have been one of the time-barred sponsorships. And Etisalat, the other, had already been discussed with UEFA, according to the CAS output.

It's a point I've made before, but bears repeating. Sponsorship is almost the paradigm example of double entry bookkeeping - you look at the sponsor's accounts and you look at the spondee's accounts. They should match. So far as I know, they do.

So proving that (for instance) the Etihad sponsorship deal was incorrectly presented in our accounts inherently involves the allegation that it was equally incorrectly presented in Etihad's accounts as well - which were independently audited by (IIRC) E & Y. So what is being alleged is not just that City fraudulently concealed the true nature of the payments from our own world-class auditors in our own accounts but that Etihad did the same. (And Etisalat, and Aabar, etc etc...)

It is possible that they have evidence that would demonstrate that this is the case. But it would take some pretty convincing evidence. A lot more convincing that a few emails in Der Spiegel.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

The ride never ends.

Is that Roller Coaster Tycoon, by any chance?

Chris Sawyer, Andy Hine and Damon Hill like these posts!!

 

[BrianW]

'It's a pun!' the King added in an offended tone, and everybody laughed, 'Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first—verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

(Alice in Wonderland - and if you read the trial bit, you will see the Premier League were heavily involved.)

 

[slbsn]

It's a point I've made before, but bears repeating. Sponsorship is almost the paradigm example of double entry bookkeeping - you look at the sponsor's accounts and you look at the spondee's accounts. They should match. So far as I know, they do.

So proving that (for instance) the Etihad sponsorship deal was incorrectly presented in our accounts inherently involves the allegation that it was equally incorrectly presented in Etihad's accounts as well - which were independently audited by (IIRC) E & Y. So what is being alleged is not just that City fraudulently concealed the true nature of the payments from our own world-class auditors in our own accounts but that Etihad did the same. (And Etisalat, and Aabar, etc etc...)

It is possible that they have evidence that would demonstrate that this is the case. But it would take some pretty convincing evidence. A lot more convincing that a few emails in Der Spiegel.

Which was basically City's successful argument at CAS

 

[Sir peace frog]

I agree , so why are our emails standing out is all I’m saying .

im not brilliant with tech, but if you had 5 million emails on your data base ,if you typed in the words manchester city in your search tool that would bring up the emails you were looking at, someone has got hold of the guy that hacked all those things and asked him to search for our emails, hes been put up to it, and it wouldn't surprise me if he got paid to do it, be nice in his trial if it came out

 

[BuryBlue1977]

Make of this what you will, but I've just been privy to some startling information that would blow the lid off PGMOL and the power brokers at the Premier League, if it became public. It involves a recording of a conversation between the match day referee and VAR official at a recent away match, a recording that is now in the hands of City.

It's my firm belief that City have compiled a dossier so incendiary, that the Premier League will have no choice but to totally exonerate the Club of any wrongdoing. If they don't, this is going nuclear. Either way, we hold all the cards and this explains why we're so bullish about the eventual outcome. The Premier League are on the back foot, and in my opinion, are currently lobbying the membership as to how best to quietly end the process. I have also been advised that at least one of the "Nasty 9" has had board level discussions with City, distancing themselves from the others in the cabal.

Pep's press conference tells us all we need to know. Watch it again, look at the anger and barely controllable rage in the mans eyes. His attitude wasn't based upon him being reassured about some poxy finances & bullshit charges, it was because he KNOWS exactly what is coming.

Sit back and enjoy the ride Blues.

 

[shemnel]

@M18CTID - appreciate your comments (and the character verification!).

When I was told this yesterday, I reacted in the way most on here have. A mixture of disbelief and laughter if I'm honest. After 40 years of supporting City and hearing every conceivable terrace conspiracy theory known to man, it was going to be filed with the rest, but when it became obvious that the guy I was talking to was deadly serious and there was more to this than a simple conspiracy theory, I started to take an interest. He mentioned a couple of names who could "verify" his claims, one of whom I spoke to and I was told exactly the same thing. I'm also aware that a reasonably well known City twitter account has the same information. I'm not some wet behind the ears snotty-nosed kid, I'm what is commonly known on these pages as an FOC. A typical Mancunian cynic in all things in life, don't seek the limelight and I'm generally apathetic to stuff like this. However, in MY opinion, there is substance to this and anyone who thinks it isn't possible that such a conversation took place (and was recorded) is living in the dark ages.

Anyway, I just want to clarify a couple of things:

There's a very big difference between blackmail and leverage.
The recording wasn't obtained by surreptitious means in any way linked to the Club, whether that be by Middle Eastern special forces, Chinese weather balloons or MI5. It has been handed to the club by a third party.
The intervening "voice" on the recording was not part of the matchday on field team, not a member of the VAR team and not the matchday commander.
The on field referee received an instruction from the intervening voice, who allegedly used the phrase "levelling up".
The "dossier" I mentioned in my original email is my take on things, I have not suggested that the club has one, I'm simply expressing my opinion, although I'd be amazed if they didn't have one.
The club who have distanced themselves from the Nasty 9 is Burnley.

By posting what I did yesterday, I knew I was potentially setting myself up to be a laughing stock, accused of being a raving lunatic, a complete & utter fantasist. My PM's cover all those bases, trust me. Each to their own, I've got broad shoulders. But ask yourself this...why would a perfectly normal, regular Joe City fan, put himself through the ringer like this, if he wasn't confident in the information he was given?

Yes, it could be bullshit, but then again, it could very well be true. There's many, many scandals over the years that were scarcely believable at the time. Scandals that would never have seen the light of day but for the meanderings of some FOC on a faceless platform.

Is football in this country as squeaky clean as they'd have you believe? Yeah....right, sure it is.

The truth will out.

Up the fucking Blues.

you've really doubled down haven't you!!

 

[Chris in London]

Which was basically City's successful argument at CAS

I'm really struggling with the idea that expert opinion evidence would be enough for the PL to succeed on those charges. EG, you put all the papers in the case in front of Deloittes (say) and they say "look at this , this and this, BDO got conned." But BDO say "no we didn't" and E & Y say "we agree with BDO". How can you possibly say the accounts aren't true and fair when two leading firms of accountants say in their opinion that they are? You would be saying that City and Etihad weren't entitled to rely on their own auditors, which is plainly nonsense.

It seems to me these charges needs direct evidence of collusion. I can't see how the PL make a charge of deliberate falsification of the accounts stick unless they have evidence from someone on the inside saying "I know the accounts say X but what actually happened was Y."

That isn't going to happen on the basis of the Der Spiegel emails, so unless the PL have something we don't know about, I'm baffled about why they have made such absolutely devastating accusations with the square root of fuck all to justify them.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Yep, life's short, don't waste one second of it on morons.

This is really great advice. It took me a long time to realise it but it is liberating when you just don't engage with people who are provocative and stupid. The moral high ground is always the best place to be. I haven't mastered it with tailgating fools on the road yet but I am working on it.

 

[Shads]

I agree with this FWIW

Me too.