PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[cheekybids]

Both Liverpool and Stockport are Merseysiders!

All shit flows downstream ;-)

 

[cheekybids]

The Saudis could cross-section him for us if he accepts their dinner invitation. :)

You know I find it hilarious that journalists have no fear of criticising the Saudis but are shit scared & saying anything against the Dippers…… bizarre.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

You know I find it hilarious that journalists have no fear of criticising the Saudis but are shit scared & saying anything against the Dippers…… bizarre.

They don't sell too many newspapers in Saudi.

 

[eyalluvitt]

He hasn’t. He’s just extrapolated Everton getting a 10 point deduction for one charge to what we might get with 115 charges.

He’s playing along with the current narrative that suggests we’re being relegated to Scottish football. (Hyperbole noted)

Forfar 4 Manchester City 115

 

[roy.or.r]

So what’s actually happening now? Are we getting relegated with titles stripped or are we safe?

 

[halfcenturyup]

So what’s actually happening now? Are we getting relegated with titles stripped or are we safe?

Yes

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Correct. I don't know how he could autumn into that trap.

When people do that it makes me so mad I want to go on a shooting rampage. Like in that film, Autumning Down.

 

[Norbiton]

This is true, but why the change in the treatment of pre-FFP wages?

Cock up or conspiracy, it got the job done. And it meant City still believed in 2012-13 that they could escape sanction even though the 2011-12 accounts ensured they couldn’t. If we ever did stretch the rules it was during that period when every penny of sponsorship money they could raise might make the difference. But we were sanctioned anyway so for the Premier League to try to revisit this period and penalise us again is desperate in the extreme

 

[halfcenturyup]

Cock up or conspiracy, it got the job done.

Yes, that was my point really. UEFA was determined to get City on FFP in 2014 even if it meant changing their rules at the last minute. My question was why would they want to do that? And I think the answer is concern over City opening up a "tap" of Abu Dhabi sponsorships, and making up the shortfall with two very convenient intangible asset sales. Both of which were addressed in the settlement, and both which could be described as accelerating income to which, maybe, Harris is referring. None of which is illegal or "fraudulent", by the way. Anyway, it doesn't really matter, I was just trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. The ****.

 

[Bluesince1979]

I thought that Everton were ruled out for a takeover, as with Liverpool, because of the uncertain situation of Anfield and Goodison at the time?

Sorry i meant in general.