PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Man_City_Loyal]

I’ve been involved in audits from financial, safety, quality & it’s a snapshot & a way of ensuring compliance or at least reducing the risk of failure. What always happens after failure though is it gets tougher for everyone & normally themed

around a high level failure.

Oh I know, was just saying there's always a chance to miss something due to overlook

 

[M18CTID]

And when it does kick off the press/media will claim it's nothing to do with them. After a decade of writing and talking crap making this become toxic the press/media have been stirring this hatred up. The scum press/media in this country will turn a blind eye and blame everyone but themselves.

I am beginning to wonder if I should stop wearing my City stuff, but at the moment fuck why should I hide.

I'm not a fighter but if any **** comes out with that shit to me, I'm taking as many of the fuckers down with me as possible. None of these pricks would have the balls to walk in a pub full of City fans and say it which says it all about the shithouses.

What I would add is that from my experience many match-going fans of all clubs aren't as vocal about this as the twats on social media hiding behind their keyboards.

 

[moomba]

Based of some of the weird sponsorship deals we've had from companies that are clearly owned by City, I'm finding it hard not to believe we won't be charged with something. I can't remember the betting company we were sponsored by but the picture of the CEO was just some stock image from google ha, definitely some dodgy stuff going on

Having a sponsor from a related party isn't against the rules fwiw.

Most of the clubs in the league have had a sponsor like that betting company.

Including Liverpool and Man United.

 

[HelloCity]

Based of some of the weird sponsorship deals we've had from companies that are clearly owned by City, I'm finding it hard not to believe we won't be charged with something. I can't remember the betting company we were sponsored by but the picture of the CEO was just some stock image from google ha, definitely some dodgy stuff going on

When you spend too much time on social media.

 

[cookster]

“Which seems to be supported by strong evidence”.

Can’t be that fucking strong if it seems to be supporting.

Fucking fraud.

Which has been pointed out to the prick on the thread.

 

[JASR]

The guy posts on Redcafe and spent 9 months repeatedly insisting that the Qataris would end up buying the club as his ‘background in M&A’ meant that he knew there was no way could Radcliffe win

Oh … is he the one that came to the conclusion that united (correctly) had zip money to spend?

can’t remember that posters username, but he stayed in his lane and seemed knowledgeable about united day-2-day finance … or he at least did at the time (sept ish).

Or perhaps I’m just confusing posters in a Ramble/Rumble way

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

They honestly believe if not for corrupt City, Spuds would have been in the CL in the years they didn't qualify.

Us not cheating to qualify would mean an extra CL space which Spuds think they'd have taken.

My cousin's actually blame their lack of success on City's success. 乁⁠(⁠ ⁠•⁠_⁠•⁠ ⁠)⁠ㄏ

The only time they have been in a title race recently, they bottled it to a team that were 5000-1. Don’t blame City, blame Jamie Fucking Vardy.

 

[jrb]

From what little is known publicly about the case, and findings from the CAS verdict, it is entirely possible that City could be found guilty of not co-operating with another investigation. However, Ioannidis (leading sports lawyer and professor at Sheffield Hallam University) and Plumley (sports finance expert and also at Sheffield Hallam University) contend that the Premier League must instead prove its most damning allegations - held to a higher standard than a normal civil case because of their seriousness - to satisfy the judging panel.

"It would not be good enough for the Premier League to argue that Manchester City failed to co-operate with the Premier League’s investigation," they write. "The Premier League would have to go beyond this, by proving that Manchester City, as a matter of fact and evidence, failed to produce accurate financial information (and/or lied about it) in relation to their revenue, within the meaning of the current regulations.

"This is not an easy burden for the Premier League. But it should not be easy, because the allegations produced are of a very serious nature.

Premier League FFP charges for Man City could cause 'mutiny' as UEFA warned

Manchester City are preparing their evidence to refute strong accusations from the Premier League that could change the game

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

The guy posts on Redcafe and spent 9 months repeatedly insisting that the Qataris would end up buying the club as his ‘background in M&A’ meant that he knew there was no way could Radcliffe win

I spent a chunk of my weekend arguing with someone who claimed to be trained in law that the CAS judgement was actually quite clear that City had broken multiple FFP rules if you just knew how to read between the lines. A little bit of education is a dangerous thing.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

Having a sponsor from a related party isn't against the rules fwiw.

Most of the clubs in the league have had a sponsor like that betting company.

Including Liverpool and Man United.

Liverpool were fucking formed as a football club for that purpose ffs.

I'm working on a theory that a bunch of red shirt fans don't like City because they deep down don't like the sporting world they've been central in creating and they want to externalise it on a folk devil.