PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[PPT]

It’s impossible for us to be guilty and for all other clubs to be whiter than white, we know about the Dippers cheating FFP and the Rags having their HQ in the Cayman Isles but what about other teams and the whole raft of dodgy dealings, from Agents to Sponsors and anything in between.

But the other clubs don’t need to prove it. We do. Big difference unfortunately

 

[ayrshire_blue]

No one is suggesting that our accounts are fraudulent or our auditors have done anything wrong. Audits are not there to prevent fraud. Our auditors are not expected to go to the Middle East to try the impossible task of verifying the original source of funds coming into the club. In fact, if we were accused of some criminal charge I would be more comfortable. The standard of evidence required would no doubt ensure that most of the PL accusations would be immediately thrown out.

Without wishing to downplay what are obviously very serious accusations against our club, I look upon this case more like the situation where you join your local golf club and you agree to abide by the regulations but do not. The committee may throw you out. This case is dealt with on a far more formal basis than would happen at your local golf club but nevertheless it is a civil and not criminal case and the rules may enable "evidence" to be brought forward that would not otherwise be allowed and which may be judged upon by looking at the balance of probabilities.

I'm led to believe, if I've picked up @projectriver, @Prestwich_Blue and others correctly, that saying our accounts are effectively fraudulent is exactly what they're saying by charging us. And by consequence, the auditors are either (a) complicit in the fraud or (b) they too have been completely deceived by the club.

 

[Bez]

As you say we will be cleared of the main charges but some of the minor shit will stick which will allow Jordan et Al to claim we we found guilty.

That will be when we threaten Jordan with legal action if our legal advisors say it is worthwhile.

 

[WRicko]

No one is suggesting that our accounts are fraudulent or our auditors have done anything wrong. Audits are not there to prevent fraud. Our auditors are not expected to go to the Middle East to try the impossible task of verifying the original source of funds coming into the club. In fact, if we were accused of some criminal charge I would be more comfortable. The standard of evidence required would no doubt ensure that most of the PL accusations would be immediately thrown out.

Without wishing to downplay what are obviously very serious accusations against our club, I look upon this case more like the situation where you join your local golf club and you agree to abide by the regulations but do not. The committee may throw you out. This case is dealt with on a far more formal basis than would happen at your local golf club but nevertheless it is a civil and not criminal case and the rules may enable "evidence" to be brought forward that would not otherwise be allowed and which may be judged upon by looking at the balance of probabilities.

We might not be directly being accused of false account but I think that’s essentially what it amounts to. We are accused of more than just not following we are accused of faking revenue and hiding / reducing costs

I get that Auditors are not perfect and just because they don’t find stuff does not make them in on it or negligent but they would surely have found the some of the stuff mentioned or at least had questions

 

[FantasyIreland]

Somewhere in Bristol!

View attachment 70598

They'll be some furious sister fingering going on in that dive.

 

[pavelsrnicek]

Fifa also now worried about an independent regulator in England.

I bet they fucking are!!

I think that’s a PL shot across the bows of the government. The old guard don’t want a regulator. FIFA have rules against national governments or political interference in football. The implication is that somehow the regulator is going to be just that, while in the Times article says FIFA won’t do anything until the regulator is in place.

Lots of wasted paper and ink if you ask me.

 

[pardoeofftomexico]

I'm led to believe, if I've picked up @projectriver, @Prestwich_Blue and others correctly, that saying our accounts are effectively fraudulent is exactly what they're saying by charging us. And by consequence, the auditors are either (a) complicit in the fraud or (b) they too have been completely deceived by the club.

They are saying that we have not complied with the rules of the their club (The Premier League Club). The audited accounts will be subject to much adjustment before we give figures to the PL. Expenses are added or deducted to comply with their rules. We have already been penalised years ago for non-compliance without suggestion that our accounts were fraudulent. I don't think the PL have said this and I hope they would be a bit more careful. There may well be journalists/commentators who would say that but they know nothing. I was senior partner in a substantial accountancy practice for 40 years and don't think the auditors will be very worried about their work.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

They are saying that we have not complied with the rules of the their club (The Premier League Club). The audited accounts will be subject to much adjustment before we give figures to the PL. Expenses are added or deducted to comply with their rules. We have already been penalised years ago for non-compliance without suggestion that our accounts were fraudulent. I don't think the PL have said this and I hope they would be a bit more careful. There may well be journalists/commentators who would say that but they know nothing. I was senior partner in a substantial accountancy practice for 40 years and don't think the auditors will be very worried about their work.

Interesting. You're far more qualified than me to make an assessment of what the charges exactly entail, so it's good to hear from people in your position. To a lay person such as myself though, it's way over my head and seems to contradict what other well qualified people have suggested (unless I'm mistaken, which is entirely possible). Your initial post today didn't sound too positive in tone, would that be a fair assumption to make from your post?

 

[argyle]

Could city’s lawyers not start the ball rolling now on suing the cunts now for defamation of character by PL announcing false charges publicly?
If city said we have evidence of PL being corrupt and want an independent investigation into it. And announced this publicly. Would we be allowed to get away with that?
What’s the difference?

No.

City fans need to start accepting that the club will not be 'going after' the PL or PGMOL.

There are no grounds for suing for defamation.

The club will defend itself well at the hearing and that will be that.

 

[foggy1974]

Had a convo on sat night with a rag. Said we cheated which is why we got fined £10m by CAS.
Asked how we cheated then? He said making sponsorship deals up

Told him the real reason we got find by CAS and his reply … “bollocks”

Cant win

Should have asked him if we're guilty when does the 2 year European ban kick in