PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[WRicko]

If we were accused of fraud then the Serious Fraud Office or similar would be investigating this but they aren't. The Premier League have accused us of breaking their own Premier League rules and that's it.

The Premier League cannot investigate crime, it can only report it and refer it to criminal bodies for investigation. However an investigation (not by criminal bodies) has apparently already taken place and the Premier League has charged us so there is no accusation of criminal fraud whatsoever. If there was then we'd be looking at a criminal case and trial but we aren't.

If there is no fraud whatsoever then yes it cannot be worded as such because it would otherwise be libellous to do so.

I am somewhat convinced that this is all
smoke and mirrors because of what you say. Which I already thought.

You are correct in a sense that the Premier League are not accusing us of fraud. They don’t use the words.

You are also correct to say that they would should or would have to report us to someone if they thought we where committing fraud

However the above does not change the fact that inflating revenue hiding costs as we have been accused of for FFP or other reasons (and they are not separate ) is false accounting. The legal experts on here will explain it better than me but my understanding of what they have said is this is a type of fraud. If this cooking the books also lead to a gain however small financial or otherwise this would amount to proper fraud. Could be gain in footballing terms financial gain or even reputational. I think it’s fairly easy to claim it lead to this gain.

So I go back to my point the charges amount to accusations of fraud. Please tell me where I am wrong.

I would like to know where the experts on this forum say I have gone wrong.

The above is why I think it might be smoke and mirrors you don’t in affect accuse someone of fraud without actually coming out and saying it without referring it on to the proper authorities. Unless it’s all made up unless of course something is going on in the background with the police that we do not know about

 

[Metalartin]

I am somewhat convinced that this is all
smoke and mirrors because of the what you say.

You are correct in a sense that the Premier League are not accusing us of fraud.

You are also correct to say that they would should or would have to report us to someone if they thought we where.

However the above does not change the fact that inflating revenue hiding costs as we have been accused of for FFP or other reasons (and they are not separate ) is false accounting. The legal experts on here will explain it better than me but my understanding of what they have said is this is a type of fraud. If this cooking the books also lead to a gain however small financial or otherwise this would amount to proper fraud. Could be gain in footballing terms financial gain or even reputational. I think it’s fairly easy to claim it lead to this gain.

So I go back to my point the charges amount to accusations of fraud. Please tell me where I am wrong.

I would like to know where the experts on this forum say I have gone wrong.

The above is why I think it might be smoke and mirrors you don’t in affect accuse someone of fraud without actually coming out and saying it without referring it on to the proper authorities. Unless it’s all made up unless of course something is going on in the background with the police that we do not know about

I'm not a law expert but I think the answer you'll get is that it comes down to the different levels of satisfaction required for civil law vs criminal law.

The latter requires a much higher standard and they'd need a lot more than some out of context emails to get a case off the ground. However, I'd argue civil law should be off the table because of the nature of what they are accusing City/ADUG/their sponsors of, no matter how they are phrasing it(ie it's too serious to apply civil law standards). That's obviously not a viable argument since it's going to an independent commission and City have already given any possible objections to it via the English courts. Also, would City really prefer it done that way? Given the optics of having some of the parties involved(including Shiekh Mansour himself) being brought before the criminal courts for fraud, even if innocent.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Do you really think the 2nd highest ranking member of the Royal Family of Abu Dhabi would be sentenced to prison in the UK? Not a chance.

Diplomatic immunity for a start ;)

 

[fierydan]

Just looked up what other teams were affected by the ban re: entry to Europe football and these 3 popped up.
Luton, Wimbledon and Coventry.
God knows how many others.

Everton also lost the likes of Lineaker,Steven and Stevens because there was no European competition

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

It’s all obviously hypothetical, of course, but I don’t think there’s any chance the board would stand down. I do think all hell would break loose with an unequivocal guilty verdict, and the ramifications for the game as a whole would be huge. There’s absolutely no way the likes of Khaldoon would stand down though imo. I genuinely don’t think it’ll come down to that anyway.

Standing down would also be a further admission of guilt in the court of public opinion?

Perhaps rivals would then push for exclusion under the fit and proper persons test, but, as you say mate, the ramifications for the game and, certainly for UK investments would be nuclear.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

You can’t say SM won’t endorse those responsible then say Khaldoon will be fine.

Pearce and Khaldoon have UAE status far bigger and much more
important than being involved in City.

City will never accept any judgement against us and Soriano ain’t gonna be a patsy when he knows where all the skeletons are buried.

Sacking any board members is accepting findings.

Only this.

If they found us guilty, the only certainty is mutually assured destruction.

The only question would be how long it takes for the Premier League to blink and normality restored.

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

I am somewhat convinced that this is all
smoke and mirrors because of the what you say.

You are correct in a sense that the Premier League are not accusing us of fraud.

You are also correct to say that they would should or would have to report us to someone if they thought we where.

However the above does not change the fact that inflating revenue hiding costs as we have been accused of for FFP or other reasons (and they are not separate ) is false accounting. The legal experts on here will explain it better than me but my understanding of what they have said is this is a type of fraud. If this cooking the books also lead to a gain however small financial or otherwise this would amount to proper fraud. Could be gain in footballing terms financial gain or even reputational. I think it’s fairly easy to claim it lead to this gain.

So I go back to my point the charges amount to accusations of fraud. Please tell me where I am wrong.

I would like to know where the experts on this forum say I have gone wrong.

The above is why I think it might be smoke and mirrors you don’t in affect accuse someone of fraud without actually coming out and saying it without referring it on to the proper authorities. Unless it’s all made up unless of course something is going on in the background with the police that we do not know about

If you have time and inclination, you can see the status of all the current SFO cases here:-

Our cases

In this section you can find information about many of our cases.

www.sfo.gov.uk

As a lay person, a stand out feature of all the cases is an individual or group of individuals have gained direct personal wealth from fraudulent activities in which a single identifiable victim was harmed.

I am not qualified to say if there are any commonalities between the current cases and PL v MCFC.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Only this.

If they found us guilty, the only certainty is mutually assured destruction.

Calling @Didsbury Dave to the thread....

 

[Iassel]

It’s all obviously hypothetical, of course, but I don’t think there’s any chance the board would stand down. I do think all hell would break loose with an unequivocal guilty verdict, and the ramifications for the game as a whole would be huge. There’s absolutely no way the likes of Khaldoon would stand down though imo. I genuinely don’t think it’ll come down to that anyway.

If the club were found guilty on all charges - which would need the PL to pull something game changing out of their folders - then it would be incredibly difficult for the executive team to stay on. You’d be talking about one of the UKs biggest frauds in recent history, you don’t just carry on as if nothing happened. There would undoubtedly also be a strong push to disbar SM as an owner.

Now it would take something like extraordinary for the club to be found guilty on all charges, and of course the status of the executive team would then be very low on the list of issues to resolve.

 

[domalino]

If the club were found guilty on all charges - which would need the PL to pull something game changing out of their folders - then it would be incredibly difficult for the executive team to stay on. You’d be talking about one of the UKs biggest frauds in recent history, you don’t just carry on as if nothing happened. There would undoubtedly also be a strong push to disbar SM as an owner.

Now it would take something like extraordinary for the club to be found guilty on all charges, and of course the status of the executive team would then be very low on the list of issues to resolve.

I would be surprised if they were even allowed to stay on the board of a premier league club after defrauding the other member clubs for 15 years.

Presumably there’s a rule somewhere about that.