PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Roachy]

Completely agree. I just find it hard to believe they would pursue the charges purely to appease the pressure from the usual suspects no matter how rushed it was. They can’t win whatever the result of the hearing. But if it goes in favour of the PL it will be carnage.

They have had 4 years to get a case together - if it’s the same as what was heard at CAS surely they would not have bothered proceeding.

But who knows, maybe it was the pressure. Hopefully it was.

It's intriguing as to what the pressure was though. I haven't gave it much thought, but what leverage were the other clubs using against the PL to bring these accusations. Something along the lines of "get City sorted out or else". Well what was the "or else" bit. Unless the PL were complicit. Interesting and infuriating at the same time.

 

[mancboy]

you are a legal man - are you telling me that PL would have proceeded the way they have even if they were advised their case wasn’t strong enough ?

Four years to build a case and they went ahead even if advised what they have is not strong enough ?

if they didnt believe the charges, they wouldnt have charged us, but by your supposition every time a body goes after someone just purely by charging them then thats enough, thank god you arent in charge otherwise half the population would be in jail just because they had been charged.

 

[KS55]

A couple of things that keep getting raised that we should put the lid on once and for all.

Firstly, the word fraud isn't used in the allegations because this is a case of breach of contract. The contract between the PL and the club doesn't refer to fraud, so the allegations carefully (eventually) refer to the rules in the contract that were breached. The combination of rule breaches may effectively represent fraud but the absense of the word in the PL statement means nothing and implies nothing.

Secondly, there is no legal requirement, other than in a regulated industry, to report fraud to the authorities. The fact that the PL hasn't referred the club to the SFO, for example, means nothing and implies nothing.

Actually, if the SFO or others discovered a fraud that the PL clearly knew about but did nothing, the PL would get a public kicking. To protect themselves they should always report a suspected fraud irrespective of the legal duty.

 

[mancboy]

True, but I don’t think it’s a given that they only pursued this because they truly believed in the veracity of their case. It seems a bit more complex than that.

You have to factor in the pressure they were under from certain clubs and the media, as well as the looming threat of an independent regulator etc.

The fact that they seemingly rushed the announcement of the charges and had to subsequently correct themselves suggests that it wasn’t the result of a carefully drawn out, considered process.

That said, I don’t think anyone can say with any real certainty just how this will all play out at this stage.

Ive said it before and i will say it again, this was a fishing expedition by the pl, a last desperate attempt by them to say to the government 'look we have our house in order, we can look after ourselves, we dont need independed regulation' , what they didnt count on was city fighting back, they thought city would take a slap on the wrist, the red tops would be satisfied and the government mollified, that has not happened and they have spent the last 2 years trying to wangle their way out of it while keeping any sense of professionalism and power and they are failing miserable, they cant even get the psr rules right which are rules they implemented and drew up themselves to the point of having to rip them up and start again so to assume they can get something as complex as this right when they couldnt even get the original charges right is fanciful at best.

 

[MadchesterCity]

That is so bang on. They pay £85m for Antony, £65m for Casimero, £80+m for Sancho, etc. But it will be the poor bastards in the office, kitchens, training ground getting made redundant to cut costs. Laughable.

How many refs they got on the books?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

This is really the only explanation, imo, why they are continuing. They started the investigation, found some things that needed explanation but the club didn't provide the proof to support the explanations because they aren't required by the PL rules, or by UK law so to do, it being information held externally. So what do the PL do? Finish the investigation without a proper conclusion, which is a terrible situation for a governing body? Or continue with the disciplinary process, incur huge legal fees, and then "lose" the case, which is a terrible situation for a governing body.

The club has stitched the PL up good and proper over this, I think. We really have some clever people running the club.

This perfectly encapsulates my take on it too. It is by far the most likely explanation.

 

[mancboy]

This is really the only explanation, imo, why they are continuing. They started the investigation, found some things that needed explanation but the club didn't provide the proof to support the explanations because they aren't required by the PL rules, or by UK law so to do, it being information held externally. So what do the PL do? Finish the investigation without a proper conclusion, which is a terrible situation for a governing body? Or continue with the disciplinary process, incur huge legal fees, and then "lose" the case, which is a terrible situation for a governing body.

The club has stitched the PL up good and proper over this, I think. We really have some clever people running the club.

Just like most stupid organisations and people they have found themselves in a hole and instead of looking for a ladder they have decided to keep on digging, can you imagine how stupid they would have looked if after city biting back they backed up and said tbf we dont have anything concrete we're just trying to look tough to stop independent regulation by keeping it tied up with independent panels etc they have shamefully passed the buck while besmirching the clubs name, they really are a bunch of chancers who have found themselves so far out of their depth its untrue, masters is a primary school kid trying to discuss financial policy with phd students and it shows everywhere.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I re read your post and at first I thought you where say the word fraud was not used because it was not fraud but I see that you say the word fraud is not used because it’s about breach of contract but why have they chickened out of using the word fraud ?

Final point I should have made in the previous post

Why has it taken so long if they actually believe we have done what is alleged ?

So I am ignoring your first response as it completely missed the point, other than to say:

Research for yourself the requirement to report fraud rather than ask me to justify it. I freely admit I may be wrong about anything, but you think I am wrong, show me why.

Imho, the SFO isn't going to get involved if there is an ongoing civil case which will determine if there has been a fraud or not. Why would they? They can wait until it's finished, review the evidence presented in the report and then decide whether or not to proceed on the basis of a higher level of proof. I doubt they have the time or resources just to open cases based on what is in the press.

And now your second response.

They haven't "chickened" out of using the word fraud. There is no need to. They have followed their procedure and simply referred to the IC a list of rules they allege have been breached.

And the reason it's taking so long? Every legal person in here said it would take 2, 3, 4 years and that is what is happening. Simply put, the PL has brought forward a complicated case.

Also, I never said I thought the PL themselves think they will prove these allegations. My hypothesis is that the club put them in a position where they had to shit or get off the can. And they chose to shit.

 

[dadnlad]

That is nothing to do with why the allegations won't stick, imo. The PL simply won't have the evidence to prove any of their more serious allegations. They don't have access to where any incriminating evidence would be maintained and, even if they had a whistleblower, which I can't imagine they do, he would have to have, for example, contracts signed by the various parties which show the conspiracy that is alleged, otherwise it is one man's word against the club's "irrefutable evidence". No one with access to that level of information will be welching on Mansour, even if the club/owner/sponsors did what is alleged, which I can't imagine for one moment they did.

I have my own theory about the PL's actions. the club's actions, the pressure from other clubs and Masters' weakness and the likely outcome of the panel and it all points to exoneration on everything except, maybe some missed disclosures.

All imho, of course.

The majority are pinning there hopes on time barred evidence being fraudulent which is just hilarious

 

[bluealf]

Just before I went to sleep last night I read a tweet laughing over a post from 4-4-2 magazine saying we were about to be found out guilty, I never read the 4-4-2 article.

Anybody else seen it or read it?