PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

So let me get this straight ... The English FA will appoint a person who will appoint a team to check the allegations made by the FA? Isn't there a conflict of interest? What's worse is even the appeals team will be appointed by an FA-appointed person.

I actually support government/wealthy group investment in clubs. Even though I'm a Real Madrid supporter, competition is essential for revenues to grow. No one wants to see the same set of teams in the CL semis every year or the same set of Top3/4 teams in the league.

Edit: I mean the PL not FA.
 
Last edited:
Norman kneejerk said:
Interesting angle was wondering if we might have a nuclear option.
Also interesting that we are state owned when it suits but not called it fraud by Abu Dhabi state yet. That could get very interesting
Click to expand...
That is the nuclear option IMO. Try fucking us and watch what happens to any planned investments in the UK by Abu Dhabi.
 
cleavers said:
Well quite a few of the charges are for "not cooperating", so I expect we'll be guilty of those.

As I posted earlier we didn't cooperate with UEFA, because we thought we'd be shafted, so we were never going to cooperate with the PL at that point, because anything we gave them, would end up with UEFA anyway, but we did cooperate with CAS. This was a good policy since UEFA failed to shaft us, and we were found not to have done anything wrong. I fully expect the same will apply, we'll let it go to this "independent commission" and then cooperate and get a similar result, especially as it seems to be based on exactly the same evidence.
Click to expand...
Oh yes I understand all that, it was a rhetorical question, i.e. if we haven't co-operated then they can't have any evidence, unless they've hacked into the club's systems.

Seems a bit dumb to me given that the UEFA case was overturned and the only thing they were able to fine us for was not co-operating, but I know I wouldn't have if they were using either fake or stolen emails against me, which would have been inadmissible evidence in a proper court.
 
coolcity said:
First sentence says it all. I think we can expect something to come out of it, but I don't think it will be that serious. What I would like to know is how do they come to the conclusion that we're guilty of a specific number of instances if they say we haven't been co-operating?

As for what anybody else thinks, a lot of them already think that way anyhow since the UEFA bullshit so no change there then. I couldn't give a toss what anybody else thinks to be honest. Where have the likes of Chelsea got their £400 million from then, other than the new owners bankrolling the club? What about United when you consider the Glazers didn't have any money to buy the club and had to mortgage it? No questions asked?

Nothing's going to happen for a while anyway, it's taken them 5 years to get this far.
Click to expand...

I get the feeling the non cooperation is that we don’t provide them anything they haven’t asked for specifically. We won’t allow fishing, their response is possibly we’ve got something to hide.
 
ilrm said:
So let me get this straight ... The English FA will appoint a person who will appoint a team to check the allegations made by the FA? Isn't there a conflict of interest? What's worse is even the appeals team will be appointed by an FA-appointed person.

I actually support government/wealthy group investment in clubs. Even though I'm a Real Madrid supporter, competition is essential for revenues to grow. No one wants to see the same set of teams in the CL semis every year or the same set of Top3/4 teams in the league.
Click to expand...
English FA? You went wrong there.
 
coolcity said:
Oh yes I understand all that, it was a rhetorical question, i.e. if we haven't co-operated then they can't have any evidence, unless they've hacked into the club's systems.
Click to expand...
Somebody else did that, and they appear to be using those same "hacks" to a degree, and that is why we didn't cooperate in the first place, we had the evidence for CAS, I don't imagine it's changed much.
 
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.