PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The club need to do something such as banning these gobshite journos from the Etihad or one of these days blues will loose their shit and one of them will be battered. It's inevitable. You can see form rhe past 20 or so pages and by reading twitter or Facebook, that fans have had enough of the constant abuse.
It will take one pissed up and pissed off blue to snap and then a few will join in.
City need to take action and ban the main **** journos before it happens.
 
On reflection I am glad the issue in now going to a 3 person tribunal. The fear of a stitch up is nothing compared to the realisation that the tribunal is grossly inadequate to carry out such an investigation.

amateur hour v the alleged criminal mastermind Khaldoon who has built up a huge syndicate network for 13/14 seasons.

My money is on the baddie -:)
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
I’m sure there will be some things we haven’t done correctly. I can’t see how 115 charges can be brought without at least one being true
Click to expand...
But there aren't 115 discrete or separate offences.

There are essentially 2 - that we overstated revenue because of 'fake' sponsorships and we didn't report payments to a manager and the players.

You could probably split that first one into Etihad and Etisalat, although disguised owner investment is the core of those.

The second is more properly two separate issues, which are Mancini's Al Jazira contract and image rights payments to players.

There are two further offences, which cover FFP and the PL's own financial rules. If the first two can't be proven then these further two are irrelevant.

The 115 comes from splitting these charges across different rules and multiple years. The sponsorship ones cover 50 of the 115 and if the PL fail to land their case on these then that's 50 that fall at one fell swoop.

It's a common theme from fans that "115 charges. You must have done something wrong". That's a complete lack of understanding of the real situation.
 
rags banned a few journos from a presser few weeks back because they wrote a few articles did not run by the press people at the club.

wonder all these slander articles are run by the City for a comment or anything lol.

in contrary we probably give the VIP treatment to the likes of Delaney, Holt etc

having Blackburn (is he still active...) and maybe Gaughan on the dial is not enough media control nowhere near enough.

the shit Carragher and Neville spouts about us and Pep goes and have direct interviews with them and some monday night tactical analysis fuck that would fucking ignore them with no handshake nothing.
same when he did "Collymore who"?
thats the fucking way to treat these people.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But there aren't 115 discrete or separate offences.

There are essentially 2 - that we overstated revenue because of 'fake' sponsorships and we didn't report payments to a manager and the players.

You could probably split that first one into Etihad and Etisalat, although disguised owner investment is the core of those.

The second is more properly two separate issues, which are Mancini's Al Jazira contract and image rights payments to players.

There are two further offences, which cover FFP and the PL's own financial rules. If the first two can't be proven then these further two are irrelevant.

The 115 comes from splitting these charges across different rules and multiple years. The sponsorship ones cover 50 of the 115 and if the PL fail to land their case on these then that's 50 that fall at one fell swoop.

It's a common theme from fans that "115 charges. You must have done something wrong". That's a complete lack of understanding of the real situation.
Click to expand...

I'd like you to answer 1 question..

If they convict on the charges, do we have a right to appeal since as you stated it's the wrong forum and it's basically accusations of a 10 year fraud!
 
Here's my take on why City handle things the way they do with the press etc.

HHSM is the owner of City and the culture of the club at boardroom and employee level is directed by him via Khaldoon. In many ways this is excellent for the club in too many ways to mention and that are well known.

However, Mansour is a a member of his country's royal family. To repeat, he is royalty and thinks of himself, and everything associated with him, as such. Remember our late Queen and how she would not stoop to ever respond to any lies, liable or slander aimed in her direction because to her mind it was simply beneath her. Unthinkable to respond to the mud thrown by those too far below to even be worthy of a response.

IMO this is the thinking of Mansour. His concerns are that City is run well and with standards of excellence and those values lead to success and constant winning. As far as he would be concerned, that vision is being made reality.

I actually think there are a number of areas where City could see considerable improvement (ticketing, treatment of fans most particularly) but those issues are not Key Performance Indicators as far as HHSM is concerned when meeting with Khaldoon to discuss City. Likewise, responding to the petty insults of the UK media are not his concern.

FWIW, I don't agree with this approach in some ways. I agree that getting into a back and forth with the dregs of the British media would be pointless and drag us down to their level, but I do think there's more the club could do to protect our reputation and support the fanbase. I just think it's not a priority (or even on the radar) of City's owner for the reasons stated above.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But there aren't 115 discrete or separate offences.

There are essentially 2 - that we overstated revenue because of 'fake' sponsorships and we didn't report payments to a manager and the players.

You could probably split that first one into Etihad and Etisalat, although disguised owner investment is the core of those.

The second is more properly two separate issues, which are Mancini's Al Jazira contract and image rights payments to players.

There are two further offences, which cover FFP and the PL's own financial rules. If the first two can't be proven then these further two are irrelevant.

The 115 comes from splitting these charges across different rules and multiple years. The sponsorship ones cover 50 of the 115 and if the PL fail to land their case on these then that's 50 that fall at one fell swoop.

It's a common theme from fans that "115 charges. You must have done something wrong". That's a complete lack of understanding of the real situation.
Click to expand...
I know you are pretty clued about regarding all this and the club in general. Fair play pal.
 
CC1 said:
Trouble is mate, the media WANT the club to speak out so they can jump on every comment and twist it. It gives them loads more ammunition to write about day in day out.

look what they’ve done to the Ceferin comments - totally twisted, misreported & taken out of context.

By saying nothing, they can only repeat their own opinions & run out of new things to twist. PL look to be relying on bad publicity
Click to expand...
City can't speak out publically at the moment because it would undermine our legal position. I would hope we have spoken privately to Ceferin though. When this case is finally resolved hopefully the club will speak openly and in detail making our "irrefutable evidence" clear to the whole world. This is the least our fans deserve. We are the paying customers.
 
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.