PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

adelaideblue said:
i tend to be a bit pessimistic on it, surely if the the PL thought they had a weak case with no actual evidence then they would have pulled the pin, they know the resources of city and how uefa looked after CAS - it cant jsut be a made up case to appease the red shirt brigade - their legals would have weighed up the possibility of a conviction for whatever and decided they really have a strong case - hopefully not
Click to expand...
A strong case for the Prem would mean we knowingly committed fraud not once but year upon year and left a nice trail of cookie crumbs for the PL to follow. I have absolutely not one iota of doubt that the Prem knowingly and purposefully OVERCHARGED the shit out of us in the hopes of being able to make something stick. I'm supposed to believe City committed 115 chargeable offenses and left themselves wide open to being flagged on such. Like a bunch of rank amateurs. They may as well have charged us for being the biggest fucking idiots of all time. Sorry to all those wishful thinkers out there hoping for the worst for us but that's just not remotely realistic. In the neighborhood I grew up in years ago we'd have said "Get the fuck outta here with that bullshit"...
 
adelaideblue said:
i tend to be a bit pessimistic on it, surely if the the PL thought they had a weak case with no actual evidence then they would have pulled the pin, they know the resources of city and how uefa looked after CAS - it cant jsut be a made up case to appease the red shirt brigade - their legals would have weighed up the possibility of a conviction for whatever and decided they really have a strong case - hopefully not
Click to expand...

Flip side to that.. if the evidence was that good, why did they wait 5 years to charge us with something.

And go back to that Pep's response interview.. he blamed it on Levy.. so if you read between the lines.. Levy basically strong armed the PL into charging us..

Also why have we not been convicted already after 5 years of the evidence just sitting?
 

Iassel said:
Lord Pannick is a fabulously competent KC and the club are undoubtedly in very good hands with him. With that said, I have no doubt that had Lewis not been the PLs long term man, the club would’ve loved to have him onboard for CAS and this case as his reputation proceeds him.

On him having nothing to lose, that is only applicable if the PL case is formulated around some new evidence, or perceived evidence. If it’s a straight rehash of the UEFA case it would be a Banksy-esque mark on his reputation.

On the topic of ‘talking up the odds against City’ I can assure you that’s not the case, my position is similar to Stefans - the PL on face value appear to have overcharged this to a crazy level and put themselves in the position by the very nature of the allegations that they need to deliver something way beyond ‘balance of probabilities’ to get the tribunal to find in their favour, especially as I’m sure the club will be having executives from Etihad, Etisalat, maybe even ADUG testifying. It feels like an unwinnable position for the PL team to likely have to convince the tribunal to find against their sworn testimonies, even before any further evidence that I’m sure the club intend to put on the table.

My point has only ever been that the tinfoil nature suggestions have never had any basis in reality, and there is no realistic prospect that Lewis and the PL moved on purely to appease red shirt clubs. They rushed out the charges in a misguided attempt to head off an independent regulator, but the charge sheet had clearly been laying around for some time as it referred to the pre-22 rules and they clearly think they have ‘something’, but whatever that may be, it would have to be earth shattering to land their case and that feels extremely unlikely for the reasons above.
Click to expand...

I don't buy for one minute that the PL issued the charges against City in an attempt to head off the independent regulator. On what planet would charging City make any difference to the government's plans? How has the tough sanction on Everton worked out for them, with the prospect of existential claims from other clubs? They have been blasted from all sides and if they reduce the sanction now, they look weak and incompetent. And, at the end of the day, the independent regulator isn't just about financial regulation. At the most, I suppose, the timing could have been an attempt to drown out the narrative around it, but the release of the white paper was delayed a couple of weeks so that didn't make any difference either. I think it's just as likely they are not very competent and, yes, bowing to pressure from the usual suspects.

On Lewis, he has been representing the PL throughout the investigation before the Commercial Court and the Court of Appeal, hasn't he? It would be extremely odd, imo, if he didn't present for the PL to the panel. Can you imagine if he actually refused to take the case? The PL will have lost it before they started and he wouldn't be their go-to guy any more. More likely he would have been on a retainer for the whole case from the first City tribunal hearing onward, no? Or for all PL cases?
 
Essex blue said:
I guess the Fa don’t think they will the case on 115 points but will have some joy which may result in 30 odd charges sticking.

Bear in mind some of the charges we are guilty of is breaching uefa FFP which we accepted, paid the fine and reduced squad. Non compliance may well be another so it’s easy to see 30 odd charges sticking which proves we are guilty in the eyes of the red tops even tho it’s not the serious offences everyone thinks
Click to expand...

That’s not happening…
 
Cassandra said:
The CAS decision was 2 to 1. The members of the CAS Panel were, presumably, of sufficiently high repute to be on the CAS register. So perhaps in choosing the panel the EPL are pinning their hopes on that, even with no new evidence, they can find a panel that will rule in their favour on at least some of the more substantive allegations
Click to expand...
It’s a concern that many are overlooking. UEFA’s man at CAS had a human rights background IIRC and he voted against us on one charge after another. Hard to escape the notion that he was judging us for being ‘Manchester City owned by Sheikh Mansour’ rather than open mindedly assessing the evidence on its merits
 
give it to gordon said:
I agree totally and one day a City fan is going to pay a heavy price for the hatred stirred up by our fucking disgraceful press/media. It needs calling out some of the press/media say we as City support poor human rights, what the fuck !

Have they taken a look at the usa human rights record ? Which country shall we invade today, which black person should the police shot today.

I dont think even City understand how bad things are getting. I be called a cheat in tesco lol. Get dirty looks when out and about wearing my City stuff. I do find most of the abuse towards me is from local plastics. Never had any trouble travelling to matches when being among other match going fans of other clubs.

The dippers get away with violence time after time so they take it a step further each time.

The press/media already have blood on their hands and I feel it's going to get worse once City are cleared. I never use to worry about wearing my City gear but now I find myself being more aware of people around me. Sad isnt it
Click to expand...
When other fans gob off about us cheating just politely say "yes we did, and it's bloody wonderful" that normal cuts conversation dead.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I don't buy for one minute that the PL issued the charges against City in an attempt to head off the independent regulator. On what planet would charging City make any difference to the government's plans? How has the tough sanction on Everton worked out for them, with the prospect of existential claims from other clubs? They have been blasted from all sides and if they reduce the sanction now, they look weak and incompetent. And, at the end of the day, the independent regulator isn't just about financial regulation. At the most, I suppose, the timing could have been an attempt to drown out the narrative around it, but the release of the white paper was delayed a couple of weeks so that didn't make any difference either. I think it's just as likely they are not very competent and, yes, bowing to pressure from the usual suspects.

On Lewis, he has been representing the PL throughout the investigation before the Commercial Court and the Court of Appeal, hasn't he? It would be extremely odd, imo, if he didn't present for the PL to the panel. Can you imagine if he actually refused to take the case? The PL will have lost it before they started and he wouldn't be their go-to guy any more. More likely he would have been on a retainer for the whole case from the first City tribunal hearing onward, no? Or for all PL cases?
Click to expand...
The threshold for running a hearing is that the case is arguable. For people who are well paid to argue for a living, most things are arguable.

If it’s arguable, and the PL want him, and will pay his fee, then given his previous involvement, unless there is an overwhelming ethical reason for him not to, he is professionally obliged to continue representing them. Even if he robustly advises them they are almost certainly fucked. Which, unless there is any undisclosed, significant and inculpatory evidence against City, he will certainly have done in order to cover his arse.

Once he’s told them that, and he can justify the arguable point, then he‘s good to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.