PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Moss Side's Finest said:
How about we close this thread down and just leave a pinned one like we used to have, for factual Q&A type things only. All as this thread does is causes arguments and generates clicks for shit house papers.
Click to expand...
Nobody is forcing you to read it mate. I don't click on any clickbait shit. I'm certainly not clicking on anything from Mein Kampf, sorry I mean the Daily Mail.
 
BlueDejong said:


lol
Click to expand...

This sounds like a verbatim repeat of UEFA's attempts to nobble us.

Our AUDITED accounts are verified & the taxes due were paid. We carried out our duties as per the terms of our sponsorship deals, & our sponsors paid us accordingly. Our managers have been remunerated for their considerable efforts & their relevant taxes plaid too.

The rest is just absolute & utter bullshit.

Are HMRC or the SFO beating down our doors? No.

Why would they? By the accusations levelled at City, we willingly paid more tax than we were supposed to, so why would anyone outside of the Red Top Mafia, Spuds & the rest of the G14 be arsed?

According to a BM post by a City fan based in Europe, he said no one's arsed about any of this bollocks on the continent, it's just the aforementioned cartel clubs who keep pushing this in a pathetic attempt to stop us.

It's obvious who runs the Premier League, because no business I know of would commit this level of corporate suicide against itself, in a desperate attempt to crush one of its major global assets in Manchester City Football Club.

You seriously couldn’t make this shit up.
 
chaddblue said:
Somebody with more knowledge of the issue may correct me... but they're not even charges are they? They're allegations that may or may not lead to charges?
Click to expand...

No lawyer, but I think you get charged for criminal offences by the appropriate body. In civil cases one party makes a claim (hence claimant) against the other.

So the PL doesn't make charges, it claims breaches of contract when rules are broken.

And there isn't a trial, either, in the case of the PL. There is an arbitration process.

All imh (and probably misguided) o.
 
projectriver said:
Perhaps I misjudged the point which for me was multifold and interesting when the Club was anonymised:
1. Just because the PL make a forceful point, doesn't mean it is correct or accepted.
2. There are many aspects of cooperation - the PL said "the Club" didn't cooperate because of x, y and z, Everton said they did because of a, b and c.
3. The confirmation bias that the quotes were about City was interesting to me if not to Guadino
4. The IC was dismissive of the PL case on Everton showing the subjective nature of many aspects even in relation to cooperation and document disclosure.

So, I think it was interesting but hey who cares - its just a tweet. I deleted only because so many people were convinced it was about City and didn't/couldn't see the follow up that revealed it was all Everton and I couldn't be arsed explaining over and over to excited Liverpool fans who thought they had their confirmation.
Click to expand...
I thought is was a fantastic way to make the point that anything that suggests wrong doing is automatically assumed to be about City. Even by some of our own. Well done.
 
Judge Roughneck said:
"FFP was designed by UEFA to ensure clubs don't overspend, the aim is to make sure each club will only spend what they earn which will avoid clubs from going into "dept".

Well we wouldn't want to into 'dept".
Absolutely nothing new and all the apparent sanctions are UEFA ones. Even though it's a premier league matter.

Written by a complete dope.
Click to expand...
He is plumming the depts.
 
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.