PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Chi-town blues]

 

[Scaley]

City's statement was that it had provided a "vast amount" of evidence to the PL and welcomes the review by the independent commission of the "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence that exists in support of its position". To me, this says two things: i) the club has given the PL everything it is obliged so to do by the rules (as you would expect given the HC ruling) and ii) the club has held back other evidence for the commission (I am guessing evidence from third parties). If that is so, this case is different from the CAS case where the club refused to comply with valid UEFA requests. And it suggests to me, the acceptance of a charge even for non-cooperation to be much less likely unless its part of a settlement including other, intangible benefits to the club.

May all be bollocks, of course.

I’m happy to be corrected but didn’t the PL request sponsorship info that was after 2018 so City didn’t provide it as it wasn’t relevant to the time period in question? It makes sense that our board wouldn’t submit sponsorship info that no doubt the red tops and their Spurs poodle would have access to that gives them an insight into City’s deals.

 

[Chi-town blues]

agent omar ….. nice moves

 

[BlueFurn]

After seeing Cheesy's post where he says " we have got nothing to worry about " I messaged him and asked why he was so confident, he replied saying We will be fined not guilty. Make of that what you will.

Fined or found? Not guilty is good though.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I’m happy to be corrected but didn’t the PL request sponsorship info that was after 2018 so City didn’t provide it as it wasn’t relevant to the time period in question? It makes sense that our board wouldn’t submit sponsorship info that no doubt the red tops and their Spurs poodle would have access to that gives them an insight into City’s deals.

May be right, but I hadn't heard that. Can you remember a source?

The alleged rule breaches stopped in 2018 didn't they? So I am not sure they would have looked at later periods?

 

[Bluesince1979]

I know i shouldnt … but every time i see other fans spouting on social media , its along the lines of “city are guilty, and if they arent, its corrupt and theyve bribed their way out”.

Its literally mission accomplished whatever happens isnt it. What i will say is, whatever the outcome, it wont take away any of the enjoyment of the last 15 years. We could be guilty as sin and ive still loved every fuckin minute .

 

[bluwes]

If it came to that and we got a small fine, I think City would likely accept that rather than appeal. It’d be the same as CAS.

Don’t think Khaldoon would accept anything, he want us to be fully cleared , nothing less

 

[borassic]

After seeing Cheesy's post where he says " we have got nothing to worry about " I messaged him and asked why he was so confident, he replied saying We will be fined not guilty. Make of that what you will.

We will be fined even if we are not guilty or we will be found not guilty?

 

[bakerdave76]

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Not true. City staff were told on the Friday afternoon before the Monday announcement that we'd won on all the main charges. One City fan who helps run a supporters club branch got hold of the info as he had a relative who worked at the club and blabbed to all and sundry down the pub on the Saturday night. I got a WhatsApp off a mate on the Sunday evening confirming this. It also explains how Ian Cheeseman might've got hold of it. He doesn't need to hear it directly from a contact within the club because he's got plenty of mates outside the club who have contacts within.

Both parties were given a preview of the CAS report a few days before it was made public, I believe, so they could amend any obvious errors or other things.