I get what you are saying PB and believe you but I cant help thinking the board will just ignore it all and fine us guilty.
Wasn't just COVID, most clubs will have used that, Ukraine war and Usenov being sanctioned was another mitigating factor, think he was buying the naming rights to the new stadiumI'm not going into the detail of the City charges but what I'll say with Everton is that their case was far more 'cut and dry' than the City charges as they were warned repeatedly about their FFP obligations by the PL but still went ahead and signed players and incurred losses, assuming they could write it off against Covid. The fact other teams complied with FFP and then got relegated means that they have a far more persuasive argument for compensation and, make no mistake, Everton will be sued successfully for many millions of pounds.
With you guys there are charges that have not yet been proven and that will take time and process. Plus these charges are all retrospective, there was no edict at the time the alleged offences were taking place where the PL said 'hey guys you shouldn't be doing this, please stop'.
With Everton the PL was warning them at the time they were incurring losses that they should not be signing any more players but they went ahead and did it anyway so it was far easier for the PL to find them guilty and issue the penalty.
A lot of people really confident we will be fine and use CAS outcome to back up case. But even then it wasn’t a unanimous verdict I believe we only won 2-1, so who is to say this won’t be the same. I wish I had as much faith as everyone else in this so called independent process. For 1 I don’t trust it to be independent.
It really doesn't though.
@Dribble What moomba says.He's consistently pointed out the difficulties the league will have of proving their case against us.
If it were an 'independent commission' that has decided to dock Everton 10points for their transgressions (which appears excessive and unfair on the face of it). What gives us confidence that we will be treated fairly by a similar process? Is it as simple as Everton were obviously and factually guilty of breaches whilst the burden of proof in our favour makes it very difficult for the commission to find us guilty?
Have to say that the Everton ruling has made me less confident that this will be a fair process.
as ive said earlier in this thread, its just yank business 101, when you cant compete fairly sueThe rest of football fans in this country are being gas lighted by the finger being pointed at the likes of City and Newcastle. Is conspiring to form a super league and kill top level football in this country a million times worse than creative accounting yet they got away with it.
I’d prefer it to be in the shape of a Harpoon..!Parry is an arsehole and City hater who can’t keep his mouth shut.
One day karma will come for him, possibly in the shape of Khaldoon.
CAS didn't rule on any of the PL's charges, to be clear. UEFA could potentially have brought in the image rights payments, which were within the six-year period. But they seem to have been OK with this, so it's hard to see how the PL can land this.
The Mancini contract and the sponsorship income would have been time-barred but the former is completely irrelevant and I don't think PL rules say anything (or didn't at the time) about who could sponsor clubs. As long as we recorded the income properly and it wasn't inflated, then that one won't stick either.
And for people comparing us to Everton, even in the unlikely event we were found to have breached all the rules, we still wouldn't come anywhere near failing the PL Cost & Sustainability rules.
Update: The PL rules only came into force in 2013/14 as far as I'm aware, although the rules prior to that specified the requirement to provide accounts. But as far as I can see from the 2011/12 Handbook, there's only a requirement to provide audited accounts that have been prepared in line with relevant accounting standards.