PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[daveiw01]

Why on earth would you put yourself through that lot?

You must be a a bit of a plank ;)

I wooden go that far, though you seem to have them eating out of the palm of your hand. I know terrible, oak eh?

I'll get my second coat...

 

[daveiw01]

I wooden go that far, though you seem to have them eating out of the palm of your hand. I know terrible, oak eh?

I'll get my second coat...

I don't post that often, just pop on now and again, then varnish...

 

[adr2.8i]

Martin is a clueless git really that's what I learned and am not going to waste my time plus save my brain cells

sure he was the one who went live on talksport and told everyone that he had spoken to Uefa and they told him we would be found guilty!! clueless chancer

 

[ThreesKompany]

The discredited Der Spiegl (Rui Pinto) emails are irrelevant to the latest PL allegations which are much more serious.

I'm confused. So then what is the evidentiary basis for these charges? In the case at CAS, UEFA almost exclusively relied on the emails if I recall. And CAS said that wasn't enough, especially with the burden of proof. So, for example, they would need some sort of financial transaction data to prove City paid Yaya under the table when both is agent and he say it didn't happen.

 

[Blue_Lightsaber]

I'm confused. So then what is the evidentiary basis for these charges? In the case at CAS, UEFA almost exclusively relied on the emails if I recall. And CAS said that wasn't enough, especially with the burden of proof. So, for example, they would need some sort of financial transaction data to prove City paid Yaya under the table when both is agent and he say it didn't happen.

There's no evidence!

If there was evidence.. it wouldn't have taken them 4 years to charge City.. basically Levy threw a tantrum and the PL charged us with everything but the kitchen sink and stuck us with a tribunal headed by an Arsenal fan.

Under the law.. there has to be a right to appeal and there is none (in this situation).

Also hacked documents are not proof, but apparently they are in this situation.

It's a complete witch hunt to slime us to high hell and make us look guilty.. and throw off "an independent regulator". Like we're good here, no hanky panky going on but look Squirrel!

Honestly they have nothing to get us on except non-cooperation with their witch hunt.

 

[KS55]

The evidence is clear; they can prove that:
The owners have brown skin.
The owners are Muslims.
You can’t trust an Arab.
City keep winning.
The Redshirts can’t beat us on the field.
QED. GUILTY.

 

[WRicko]

A few videos about FFP have mention extra separate off the books contracts for players but I have only ever seen that mentioned with Mancini as far as I can remember and I don’t remember it being mentioned in the email or at CAS so where has that allegation come from ?

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

A few videos about FFP have mention extra separate off the books contracts for players but I have only ever seen that mentioned with Mancini as far as I can remember and I don’t remember it being mentioned in the email or at CAS so where has that allegation come from ?

Was it the image rights that were changed to a separate company so it wasn’t going directly through the club? The Mancini issue, how do they prove he was not being paid for consulting a few days a year for a club in the UAE? These are side issues which will fall down pretty quickly. It’s the bigger stuff on sponsorship they will try to fuck us over with, they can’t prove this matter of fact as Etihad, Aabar etc don’t have to open their books. They are forming opinion this happened rather than concrete evidence it actually happened.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It’s a good question. Do the PL have any evidence?

I'm confused. So then what is the evidentiary basis for these charges? In the case at CAS, UEFA almost exclusively relied on the emails if I recall. And CAS said that wasn't enough, especially with the burden of proof. So, for example, they would need some sort of financial transaction data to prove City paid Yaya under the table when both is agent and he say it didn't happen.

 

[Chris in London]

Was it the image rights that were changed to a separate company so it wasn’t going directly through the club? The Mancini issue, how do they prove he was not being paid for consulting a few days a year for a club in the UAE? These are side issues which will fall down pretty quickly. It’s the bigger stuff on sponsorship they will try to fuck us over with, they can’t prove this matter of fact as Etihad, Aabar etc don’t have to open their books. They are forming opinion this happened rather than concrete evidence it actually happened.

Just to take the Mancini issue, it’s even more complicated than that. It’s already in the public domain that Mancini had a contract with Al Jazirah to do a certain amount of coaching For which he would be paid a certain amount of money. A contract, as you know, is a legally binding agreement that one party will do X and the other party will do Y. So City’s defence to that particular charge should be as simple as pointing to the contract and then saying “there you go, he was employed by AJ, not us.”

Which is almost certainly exactly what did happen during the 4 year PL investigation. But the PL is nonetheless alleging that payments apparently made pursuant to a legally binding agreement between RM and AJ were actually made by us. And we then concealed that arrangement in our accounts.

This inherently involves an allegation that the AJ contract was a sham. It is no small thing to allege that a contract is a sham. It is an allegation of dishonesty, one that has to be made against not only MCFC but also RM and AJ too. It is an allegation that requires a substantial weight of evidence before it can be made out.

So the PL charge is based on what evidence exactly? Absolutely nothing that is in the public domain at least. I stress I know no more about the facts of all this than everyone else, based on what is already in the public domain. What I do know is that on this issue the PL has got an absolute mountain to climb in legal terms and they appear not to have a scrap of evidence to help them on their way.