The word charge is misleading because this is not a criminal case. The press keep using the phrase that the PL have "charged" City. The PL is a sporting body and has accused us of breaching their rules. It is wrong to use the word charge in this context. The media like to hype things up.Need to check to clear up an argument
Have we actually been charged with anything?
Or, as I believe, the PL have made a number of allegations that will be heard by an independent commission who will then advise the PL if there are grounds to actually issue charges?
The cartel that demanded this version of FFP/PSR don't want competitionUnbelievable that basically the rules in place stop clubs from spending ( or owner’s spending their own money ) and being competitive and competing,which other competitive sport would this happen in totally a shambles..
Agree with everything except for the last sentence. United, Arsenal and Liverpool are the Premier League. The formation of a new league without those three clubs would have little appeal to broadcasters. Unfortunately for Everton, Wolves, Newcastle and Forest, they need the PL far more than the PL needs them.Newcastle have the financial might to challenge the whole ffp fiasco in a court of law, I hope they do. The premier league is digging its own grave with this nonsense but they're too stubborn and stupid to see it. A breakaway league will be formed as a result.
And the charges aren`t even connected to the Everton and Forest charges the thick twats.How can’t people understand that charges for 1/2 things is going to take a lot less time than dealing with 115 different charges when the 1/2 pled guilty & the 115 rejected the claim & has to be investigate further. You’d think it would be REALLY obvious but apparently not
I wonder if the PL has examined Everton's finances back to 2008 like they have done with City.I doubt most understand, they just see FFP / FSR and assume that City have broke it 115 times Very few have looked into the charges or what they maybe. Not one of our charges as a stand alone charge amount to anywhere near what Everton were accused of they breached FSR to maintain their PL status ate the expense of other clubs they then lied amount loans being for the stadium and also claimed many time more in Covid losses than the next a highest
Of the 115 we are accused of in fact breakdown to 5 on multiple years
Agree with everything except for the last sentence. United, Arsenal and Liverpool are the Premier League. The formation of a new league without those three clubs would have little appeal to broadcasters. Unfortunately for Everton, Wolves, Newcastle and Forest, they need the PL far more than the PL needs them.
Is the correct answer.They are not experts on FFP and they definitely don't have a clue about City's finance's.
Think it's more that we've taken income streams from the establishment.I wonder how much the fact that our majority owners are Arabs/Muslims plays a part? Not many owners in the PL are of the same faith.
That's why we have to have an Independent regulator for football. The PL will be left with the job of organising football without the regulatory powers.If the Forest thing is true it just shows what a farce it is, there's no other businesses in the World that's finances are as dissected as those of football clubs, often by people who could potentially be informing rivals, the clubs financial plans, it stinks and is totally wrong and is totally anti-competitive.
Hence why the PL or UEFA won't use the word "fraud". To do so would trigger a criminal investigation & take the whole process out of their hands.The word charge is misleading because this is not a criminal case. The press keep using the phrase that the PL have "charged" City. The PL is a sporting body and has accused us of breaching their rules. It is wrong to use the word charge in this context. The media like to hype things up.