What I don't understand is this, and maybe @projectdriver can help me out if I'm being thick.
Why are we all not going with the theory (instead of all this banging our collective heads on walls).. ...that if what we are charged with is true then the PL couldn't have charged us under football rules they would have had to report us to HMRC and the serious fraud squad?
This would surely have been a better way of explaining what's going on to all the haters and the uneducated press.
I think HMRC would come afterwards. As it stands right now HMRC are happy with our accounts. If solid evidence is presented to find us guilty, I imagine HMRC would then want to know.
That's why
@projectriver has spoken about the seriousness of the charges. The Premier League aren't just saying City have lied to us. They are saying we're lying to everyone, PL, FA, FIFA, UEFA, HMRC, auditors. And in turn their accusing all the executives at the club of lying, Sheikh Mansour of lying, Soriano, Khaldoon, Etihad and all their executives, Etisalat and all their executives, other sponsors and their executives, Mancini, his agents, other agents involved with other players, numerous 3rd parties.
As Stefan has stated in a court of law it is deemed that people are truthful. So it's a huge accusation and as a result the burden of proof has to be solid and undeniable.
It's one of the biggest accusations of fraud in the history of this country. Arguably the trial is too big for the IC, the Premier League has cast its net so far wide that it's got tangled up in something way over their head. As Stefan said, a more defined accusation arguably would have stood a better chance.
2 KC'S and probably a former finance director are now left with making one of the biggest legal decisions in the history of this country. To convict they would be saying that an extraordinary amount of people and organisations have been untruthful and that verdict would have to hold up to scrutiny.