PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[fitzy blue]

Looking forward to tomorrow's news that the premier League are also going to thoroughly investigate every other premier League club.

 

[creditunionhero]

Well, if they have located this third party, and managed to link transactions from them to club employees, without the club acknowledging them in their accounts, then you clearly have off the books transactions.

They could have very well approached former employees and got this info straight from the horses mouth. It wouldn't necessary have any implications on them, as players do sign separate image deals, commercial incomes, play bonuses etc...

But this activity has to show on the clubs accounts, and if they don't, then the disparity in the accounting is fairly obvious.

You could potentially be paying someone 80 grand a week salary, on the books, but then have a further 100 grand per week under the table. The player is not liable for it, although it is a bit dodgy, but they can just blame it on their agents who did all the paperwork for them.

100+ breaches could be just that. In the form of transactions from a third party, to employees which do not show up in any of the clubs accounts. The club could potentially deny all knowledge of this 3rd party, but they've probably already established the direct link. Which is why they are so confident to announce it to the world.

That would not prove that the club new a player was getting income from other sources.

A player could claim his agent was responsible but that would not fool HMRC, they would be down on them for tax evasion (it is illegal not just "dodgy")

 

[Grassland Blue]

I wouldn’t be surprised if every club did that to some degree. Very few huge multi million/billion pound businesses run everything by the book

Donald Trump likes this post...

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

That was the GPC’s pension fund transfer

This was the only player he ever signed that he had never seen play, not even on a video. Hmmmmmmmmm

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Noticed that **** but going to bed so couldn't be arsed.

His username hasn't gone unnoticed either. Red twat.

Absolutely, clocked the twats username right away.

 

[domalino]

Where the f*** have you got that from? Stop making things up

Is that supposed to be directed at me?

 

[Stoned Rose]

We need to refrain from the whataboutery, life is full of it and is ignored as and when required.

Don't bother wasting oxygen with people on Twitter or armchair fiscal experts.

When things are serious, people such as President Biden have to jump on a plane to Saudi and fist-bump the Crown Prince to beg for more oil.

Or Trump travels to Abu Dhabi and is told where to sit by Sheikh Mansour.

This is so much bigger than City if it comes to it.

If we think the UK is in trouble now, wait until Sunak picks up the blower and is told £50bn is being invested elsewhere.

 

[manimanc]

Been at work. Anything much happen today?

Where do you work in a cave? That's one long fuckin shift my friend.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Amateur hour.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Calling @Prestwich_Blue given the most recent allegations are dro 2017 is there no time limitation in Pl regs?

I'm back home now so can have a look at this shit in more detail but my understanding is that just because there isn't an explicit limitation, doesn't mean one can't be applied in law. The accepted limit in English law is six years so a court could potentially apply that in this case. That would possibly disqualify anything that happened prior to February 2017 therefore.

In the CAS case, I seem to remember that they looked at the whole of the latest financial year within that six year period, so that would include anything in and after the 2016/17 financial year.

We know who's pulling the PL's strings here. My suspicion about this case has always been that the PL want to escape with their honour satisfied without rocking the boat any more than necessary. That was the case with UEFA, who offered us a soft settlement which we refused.

So if this 'independent commission' were to say that all the events were time-barred, then the PL can say they tried and loads of mud sticks without any actual examination of the charges and evidence for and against. We would be forever tainted and that would probably suit our US-owned rivals even more than a six or seven figure fine.

With UEFA, we knew what the charges related to, courtesy of Der Spiegel, and it was easy to see how ridiculous they were. I said at the time that those emails were very selective and very much 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink'', casting aspersions without any real evidence. CAS comprehensively confirmed that view of course.

It's hard to say in this case as the charges seem quite extensive and appear to relate to matters not in the public domain. It could be we have done significant things wrong or it could be that they've picked up little things that are open to interpretation. It could be the difference between the equivalent of a major, deliberate attempt to defraud VAT and a simple misunderstanding about a VAT calculation on mileage claims. We'll find out in time I guess.

Not sure if it's already been pointed out but, unlike UEFA and CAS, there is no arbitration in the PL rules. So this could easily end up in court. We could yet see Pannick in the courts of London again.

The other thing that struck me was that this seems to be a replay of the events of 1904-1906, when the FA were determined to find something wrong at the nouveau riche, upstart club that had upset the Football League aristocracy like Aston Villa by nearly winning a League and FA Cup double in 1904, just ten years into its existence.

Billy Meredith spilled the beans on illegal payments to players and we got absolutely hammered, while other clubs doing exactly the same thing (i.e. pretty well all of them) were unaffected. I'm sure if the PL spent four years going through Liverpool's, united's Arsenal's and particularly Chelsea's books, they'd find something they didn't like. But we know they won't turn that stone over to see what crawls out.