PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[domalino]

Was a bit despondent this morning when the news first broke, but feeling a bit more bullish since reading the Simon Mullock article. Would love it if we prevailed again.

The Mullock article creates a pathway for the club to get through this and for the whole thing not to be the club's fault (PL rushed some crap charges through to delay government oversight).

As a fan that's comforting and inspires some hope, but it does also feel a very convenient story to keep the fans onside.

If it's true though, I think it really amplifies @BillyShears point about the upper management's failings in diplomacy.

 

[Maly]

Profit and sustainability is just the term for PL FFP, and one of the terms is disclosing all remuneration paid to staff including bonuses.

So Mancini's Al Jazira seminar bonus would break that if it could be proven to be a form of City paying him.

How could the Prem prove that? They have zero jurisdiction over Al-Jazira, so surely that’s impossible to prove without Mancini providing his bank statements no?

 

[WestGorton]

Top guy, is Mike. By the way, do you really mean subliminal? Just asking…

I think so. He has to be impartial but he asked questions on behalf of the fans about the witch hunt.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

WTF we@ve not made the headlines on the main BBC news...standards are slipping.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

I just compared the original statement to the updated one and it's really not as big as the club are implying (though I can see why lawyers would find it amusing or annoying). They initially listed 1d - 1h as "premier league rules 16" when they meant "B16". See below. So possibly a sign of it being rushed, and certainly a typo, but not exactly a smoking gun.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

So let me get this right that we are charged with not 5, not 50, not 99, but 100 indiscretions. That's a nice round figure for the media to get their teeth in.
Are any other PL clubs charged or to be charged? I am damned sure that most will be responsible for many, many indiscretions of their own over the same period and beyond.
I just hope the club come out with all guns firing.This may be the last chance saloon as THEY are determined to derail our wonderful club.

One more than United’s board members came up with back in the 00s.

United won't answer the 99 questions | Soccer | The Guardian

<p>Manchester United's directors will not - and say they are not obliged to - provide answers to Cubic Expression's queries about club affairs.</p>

amp.theguardian.com

 

[Blu3m00n91]

Once again Pep will be fed to the hounds on Friday. Time and time again he’s had to face the music for these allegations. It’s about time a senior member of the board puts out their own statement

 

[manimanc]

Sorry mate.

You don't have to apologise.

 

[domalino]

How could the Prem prove that? They have zero jurisdiction over Al-Jazira, so surely that’s impossible to prove without Mancini providing his bank statements no?

This is the point I've been making - even if we're guilty, how can they prove it?

There's a reason it took leaked emails from Simon Cliff basically saying "Ah don't worry about the sponsorship money we'll take it from somewhere else" to get the UEFA sponsorship inflation case going - you basically need a signed confession, and Cliff just saying under oath that's not what he meant got it all thrown out.

 

[flb]

The big worry is Peps future at City now , he cited political reasons , and his constant expectation to fend off the press and fans at Barcelona as to why he left,as a result , make no mistake about - city have just become political overnight , he hates the press as it is , and now the prodding and questioning will increase tenfold , I hate to say it , but I fear the end is coming for Peps time at City , guilty or innocent , this shit has just got serious.