PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[cheekybids]

You follow drugs, you get drug addicts and drug dealers. But you start to follow the money, and you don't know where the fuck it's gonna take you." -Lester Freamon

Here's the f***ing thing. Nobody talks about f***ing dodgy donors, okay? Because it makes everybody look bad. Malcolm Tucker

Same applies here. Everyone is dodgy and everyone will look bad. Keep the fucking door shut.

Like just for quoting the wire

 

[eyalluvitt]

We can win, and that's by not losing. As for what anyone else says, seriously, who gives a fuck.

I meant from an outside perspective, obviously we will be elated but the childish sniping will continue

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I have red mates , in good jobs, seemingly intelligent people, who truly believe that we paid CAS off to find us innocent. They wont have it any other way

There are people who think Trump values them and their beliefs. PT Barnum was spot on!

 

[invisibleandalone]

It was such a massive coincidence , that these charges were announced just when the rags put their "for sale" sign up. Hoping that with us out of the way a nice profitable sale could go through. If only there was an honest media out there.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

I meant from an outside perspective, obviously we will be elated but the childish sniping will continue

Like I said, don't give a fuck. Don't let it bother you, it's jealousy.

 

[Tb1981]

I firmly believe that the club are sure of their innocence We all know that this is a campaign against City that has been in progress for the last decade they thought UEFA would get us, they even wrote to CAS begging them to throw out the appeal They then spent years combing through regulations for anything they could pin on us The result 5 groups of minor infringements spread over years, but they managed to make it into 115 They rushed to get the announcement out in the process they got a lot of the charges wrong, within minutes Matin Ziegler of the Times had a comprehensive article, thus proving City’s contention that the investigation was leaking, hence their appeal to the High Court for an injuction, which was dismissed, however it is all evidence that Pannick will use. The PL don’t care about the facts which are irrelevant, they wanted to discredit us and it and worked regardless of the outcome of the PL commission we are guilty in the eyes of the rivals, and their idiot fans. People don’t understand the charges they just assume it’s FFP so, we must be cheats yet most of the charges are pre PL FFP, others dismissed by CAS. The narrative was manipulated to say we only “got off” at CAS due to time barring, one charge was time barred so CAS couldn’t look at it. Of course the PL don’t have time barring however, it is likely that Pannick and his team will have most of the charges dismissed, the PL are incorporated under UK law which has a statute of limitation of 6 years that can’t be ignored. Stay calm and we will soon ahve another double to celebrate beat UEFA & PL

Good post
It’s amazing that they have even tried to throw all this shite at us again.
The thing that is most shocking to me and proves the whole sport is bent is that UEFA found us guilty and banned us when it turned out (according to CAS):
1 - they had no supporting evidence
2 - they ignored their own rules (time barring)

This just proves that they decide you are guilty and then ignore any due process to get to the end goal.

 

[cucumberman]

Following on from the post from @acton28.blog detailing the charges, I've tried to summarise them below.

Some of these charges are quite ridiculous, and their inclusion can only be for the effect of making City look bad. They are deliberately and unnecessarily vindictive. Let’s have a look at them in more detail.

9 charges (2009/10 to 2017/18) that “In all matters and transactions relating to the League each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the League with the utmost good faith.” I can’t think of anything specific we might have done relating to this, so the PL must be saying that by breaking the other rules, we have not acted in good faith to them or other clubs.

Funny that they didn’t charge Liverpool under this rule, when they found out they had hacked in to our scouting databases in 2013. The PL said in response to their decision not to take action against Liverpool, “This is due to a number of factors including the age of the alleged concerns and the settlement agreed by the two clubs involved.” So, the age of the alleged concerns applies in one case but not the other?

Also, nine Premier League clubs (Arsenal, Burnley, Chelsea, Leicester, Liverpool, Man Utd, Newcastle, Spurs and Wolves) wrote to CAS asking them not to lift Manchester City's European ban. This seems to me very much like acting in bad faith towards another PL club, and a breach of the same rule. But none of them were charged.

40 charges under different rules in each season from 2009/10 to 2017/18, but essentially are:

- Company accounts to be registered with Companies House and the PL by 1 March.

- Submission of interim accounts to the League, if annual accounts end before 30 November in current season.

- UEFA applicant clubs to provide to Premier League upon request, future financial information including P&L and cash flow.

- Requirement to notify PL of changes in circumstances that might affect finances.

1 charge in 2009/10 relating to ticket sales to visiting clubs. Quite what they suspect us of doing, and why it has taken so long to come to light, and why it doesn’t fall within the Liverpool “age of the alleged concerns” precedent, I can only speculate on. My guess is it’s a witch hunt. I wonder how many other clubs have been investigated for ticketing irregularities back in 2009.

8 charges between 2009/10 and 2012/13 relating to manager remuneration - the Mancini contract allegations?

12 charges between 2010/11 and 2015/16 relating to player remuneration. Could this be the image rights issue?

5 charges of failing to comply with UEFA regulations, in the years from 2013/14 to 2017/18. In failing UEFA FFP, United broke this same rule recently, but they haven’t been charged by the PL yet.

25 cases of failing Profitability and Sustainability rules, from 2015/16 to 2017/18. I would say from a layman’s POV, this is really one rule, split out into nine separate clauses (eight in two of the years). But rather than saying we have allegedly broken Profitability and Sustainability rules in three seasons, it looks better for them to count it as 25. (Acting in good faith towards a member club?)

30 accusations amounting to failure to cooperate in respect of seasons 2018/19 to 2022/23, citing six rules in each season.

I’ve checked my figures over a few times using https://www.premierleague.com/news/3045970 as a reference. It looks a lot like 130 charges to me, so I suppose the PL have generously rounded it down, or they can’t count.

Well whatever it is on the allegedly several million £ on renumeration. On the grander scheme of things beyond football fanaticism of who supports what club and thus who are predetermined to besmirch the development and success (globally) of City, the UAE has been investing 22 billion £ to us to date on country-2-country partnerships, on developments of CleanTech, GreenTech, AI and SpaceTech. We have more than 100,000 employed there as well.

The PL scrutinizing and glossing over rules that are instead of wanton on clubs to survive to escape administration based on minimum finance, yet ours has been to thrive to be well under maximum finance and business acumen for financial fair play, makes us different from the reason of financial fair play.

This P&S is against football clubs like our business method that has 0 debt and profiting and sustaining from a small-medium enterprise to now a decacorn level company (and possibly a hectacorn as the CFG to the likes of Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet Google, IBM, etc) with corporrate social responsibility globally and for the future of football (NYCFC and Melbourne City have been relative success, as is our MCWFC). Whereas there are other clubs whose P&S is on profitability and sustainability based on heavy debt, thus profitability based on loss of debt and sustainability based on debt accrued year-on-year and reliant on merchandising and overpopularising history.

 

[RodneyRodney]

As Manuel said"I know nothing", but is it possible that the P.L. are only to keen to drag this out until an Independent set up is arranged by the Gov ,who dismiss this nonsense . They can then shrug and say we did our best.

Can WE summon THEM to a hearing , at a time that suits us ? Like , now ? As we have our defence prepared , Pannick is confident we can smash them clean over the gasometer. So what are we waiting for ? As the accused party, do we have the right to initiate court proceedings ?

 

[RodneyRodney]

Reading this thread these last few days has shown that this forum has a number of Liverpool and United fans mascarading as blues. And they’re in here deliberately attempting to wind blues up.

Im a huge free speech advocate normally, except where the club I love are concerned, so I am asking the mod team to please comb through the last 100 pages or so and issue some forum bans.
Please.

Oppostikn fans can wind us up on any thread they like except this one. This one is dealing with an existential threat to the club and we shouldn’t be allowing barely concealed gloating and deliberate inflammatory posting, especially when disguised as coming from City fans, often in the style of “IF we are guilty then does that mean…etc etc”.

Get rid of them please mods, this is a very emotive and important thread.

It's no more of an existential threat to our club than a 5 year old with a water pistol

 

[burning blue soul]

Nick Harris is long overdue a good suing.

Shoeing

Stewing!