PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Son of Merv]

We don’t know if Rosen is on the panel. He chooses it and includes himself or not, as he wishes.

Yes, I know. Perhaps head of the independent commission would have been a better choice of words. But I still believe that his involvement will ensure it will be as fair as it can be.
The Premier League has heavily implied, if not outright accused, a lot of people of fraud and perjury at CAS. Imagine if they arrive at an unjust guilty verdict and the Swiss prosecute HHSM of perjury. The PL verdict would have to stand up in a court of law as evidence of perjury at CAS and Rosen knows the implication of this.

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

There seems to be a tendency to believe that the charges must "have something to them" otherwise the PL wouldn't have brought them. This mirrors a development in the period leading up to the CAS hearing. It was as though the CAS hearing would go against us BEACAUSE we thought they had no evidence. And now the PL case appears to be growing in strength as the hearing approaches because we assume they must have new evidence unavailable to CAS. In fact I have had considerable experience of the football authorities going "all the way" to fight cases when they didn't have a shred of evidence. The most recent is UEFA's dispute with us when CAS found repeatedly that UEFA had no evidence to support any of the charges. Before that UEFA fought Bosman to the bitter end without any evidence apart from the contention that contract law in football was no business of the courts, but was solely the concern of the football authorities. In England they ended up losing to Spurs in court because they had tried to punish the club in a way not laid down in the rules governing football. Even before that George Eastham had won his case against retain and transfer, but considerably before then clubs had avoided this issue by timely withdrawals, so that players got their move if they pushed it so that the system remained to intimidate the less insistent. As early as the late 1920s the players' union had had legal opinion the retain and transfer was untenable in law, but the union had backed off because of cost.

So who do we trust? I have no problem at all with this one. Our owner has kept every promise he has made concerning our club. And when we were banned form the CL and fined, Ferran told us simply that UEFA's claims were "not true, simply not true." So it proved. And when we were charged (115 times) Khaldoon expressed amazement but promised that the club had a body of EVIDENCE which would prove the club's innocence "irrefutably". Evidence, eh?! I'm still wondering what if anything the PL have ... But I trust our club - I've never had any reason to doubt them.

 

[bigA]

You look at the youtube fans channels and it 3 clubs that go on about and the same 3 clubs whose noses have been shoved out of place :)

The rest of football in this country couldnt give a toss just a shame Newcastle couldnt have done the same and we have more clubs shoving them down the standings.

Would that be those 3 "fine, upstanding and squeaky clean" clubs that wear red.
One of whom is £¾ billion in debt, another one who are sponsored by a bank that has been done for money laundering and funding terrorism and one that is sponsoring a country known for genocide and gross abuses of human rights?

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

My confidence isn't coming from much said on here, where there is a lot of echoed group bravado. Or anything said by anyone with sources at the club. Or even the actions of the club (going about their business) as someone else mentioned.

It is coming from - partly the club's one and only statement, which is unambiguous and we have seen before with the last time we were found innocent. It is coming partly from a basic ability to read and digest what is available in the public domain. It would take some stretch of logic to believe all those alleged breaches have been committed by an organisation this big and this well oiled (ha, pun). And lastly partly from an ability to ignore those in the media that are either less intelligent, and/or have a clear agenda. Even if that agenda is just their own financial gain through sustained interest, i.e milking it, and not 'deliberately' malicious towards the club.

I do think the PL must think they have something, to have gone this far. I do think there may be some things we don't know that are maybe open to a difference in interpretation, and varying outcomes. But I think the club would not have gone about their business with any intention to deceive, and will be able to prove their side of it. Given all the books and activity have been signed off by various significant bodies, I struggle to think what the PL might have found that nobody else so far has. Other than either misinterpreted accounts (which should be able to be explained) or perhaps those selective spliced hacked emails, which have already been dismissed by CAS and wouldn't really trump official records.

So having weighed the evidence presented to you, you are now convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that City are innocent of all charges levelled against them.

Pretty much where I am too.

In a criminal court that would be enough for a jury. In fact it would be enough to not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of our guilt, to be found not guilty. That is because of the presumption of innocence and onus of proof.

But there is no jury in this case except for the jury of public opinion, who already have us relegated without having heard the evidence.

I’m pretty much where you are Coats, but it’s hard to shake the niggling doubt that we may still be stitched up, although I know I’m just being paranoid.

 

[silva_is_gold]

I've seen a lot of posts from him on there - over several years.

He is either:

a) not a CITY fan at all, or

b) such a needy fucker that he/she goes to extreme lengths to be accepted / not banned.

I am thinking that it is b) - and that the guy/lass has no self-respect at all. He/she just seems to exult in the many posts from scum fans that mention him/her being "ok - for a blue" - seems to give him/her some sort of 'self-worth' - the needy fucker

Definitely b) mate, looking back through the thread he's on there daily,
Why the fuck would u associate with them at all let alone daily!
All praising him, saying "it's good ur a City supporter who admits your guilty"
Fucking snake

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

The only reason I can see not to be confident is that - as you say - the UEFA governance process reflected a 'kangaroo court' - but there was the option of recourse to CAS

The fans of other clubs make a big deal about the EPL process not having that arbitration step and they are hoping that the EPL process will put CITY out of business based on 'evidence' that has been proven to be unsound

That speaks more about the character of those 'fans' - who, by their own words, therefore prefer a rigged system to a fair outcome if it can advance their preference/bias

This is what I was referring to when I asked are their processes fair or not? Which is it?
I haven’t had an answer yet, but your post outlines exactly what I was getting at when talking about the influences on the process and the supporters of those influencers.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Yes, I know. Perhaps head of the independent commission would have been a better choice of words. But I still believe that his involvement will ensure it will be as fair as it can be.
The Premier League has heavily implied, if not outright accused, a lot of people of fraud and perjury at CAS. Imagine if they arrive at an unjust guilty verdict and the Swiss prosecute HHSM of perjury. The PL verdict would have to stand up in a court of law as evidence of perjury at CAS and Rosen knows the implication of this.

They can have whoever they want. We've got Paul Harris KC - none better at this, as he proved with the CAS result.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

There are a few of these needy fuckers about. One of them wrote a piece in WSC last summer saying his love for the club wasn't as great even though we won the treble. Can't remember if it related to the money or the charges but it was a pathetic conclusion to a great season.
But others sometime embrace the narrative with shit about "remember where we've come from". It's OK if they mean 10 home goals under Pearce or 35 years without a trophy, but not if they are referencing the single season in the third tier as we've spent over 80% of our time in the top division.

I openly admit my year on year falling out of love with the game of football, or more accurately, the business of football. It’s not the game I played for most of my life until I couldn’t run anymore.

But I still love City and watching great football. I watch all the City games but generally can’t be arsed watching anyone else. I used to watch any football that was on. I just don’t have that interest anymore.

It’s City only. Hang the rest.

 

[Coatigan]

So having weighed the evidence presented to you, you are now convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that City are innocent of all charges levelled against them.

Pretty much where I am too.

In a criminal court that would be enough for a jury. In fact it would be enough to not be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of our guilt, to be found not guilty. That is because of the presumption of innocence and onus of proof.

But there is no jury in this case except for the jury of public opinion, who already have us relegated without having heard the evidence.

I’m pretty much where you are Coats, but it’s hard to shake the niggling doubt that we may still be stitched up, although I know I’m just being paranoid.

Yeah, pretty much, other than how loosely we use the word evidence I guess. In the sense there is no evidence material from the city side out there. Butnfrom all the PL have put out and the club have stated, and what was previously available through the cas verdict, yes I think it is highly highly unlikely that the allegations are true.

 

[Groke]

In the dictionary under Irony - there should be a picture of 40,000 utd fans singing you cheating bastards