PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[argyle]

I agree with the standard disclosure but it remains to be seen if there is a smoking gun! Surely either way it’s pure speculation?

Yes, I have as much clue as anyone.

But, realistically, the official emails won't likely be showing anything that some fans want - corruption, etc.

I mean we already know some clubs were pushing for us to be investigated and barred as they sent a bloody letter signed by them.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Clutching at straws.

There will be no smoking gun in the PL's emails that stop the 115 charges or brings the PL down etc. Maybe the emails will show those clubs have contacted the PL pushing to investigate but that, currently, isn't against the rules.

City fans thinking the PL's emails will prove corruption is as wishful thinking of the redshirt fans thinking our own emails prove accounting fraud.

We have no idea what will be in 15 years of emails and texts, many sent well before Der Spiegl. I would be surprised if there was a smoking gun but there could well be lots of other conversations that shows bad faith from the PL or rival Directors towards City. Let's wait and see. That's assuming we ever see the content.

 

[argyle]

Sending emails isn’t the problem but I think it would be naive at this time to think over 12 odd years that there hasn’t been an email or two sent to first Scudamore and the Masters that hasn’t mentioned City or Arab money in a derogatory manner from either Liverpool, United or Arsenal forcing investigation or general comments in a negative manner that can then be interpreted as discriminatory or influencing the Premier League to take action on one club?

I'd be very surprised if they did derogatory messages through the official channels.

I'm just saying in the million or so emails that were hacked from City, all they could muster was 6 emails and they were taken out of context and aren't enough to prove fraud, or secret back channels of funding. So, logically and realistically, theirs will be the same. Nothing that will drop the charges or bring action.

We already know they were trying to influence the league because of the Arsenal headed letter. They probably did have emails with other clubs but again, currently, that's not against the rules, unfortunately.

Maybe afterwards we'll show just how much pressure was placed on us from others, in our call for an independant regulator.

 

[argyle]

We have no idea what will be in 15 years of emails and texts, many sent well before Der Spiegl. I would be surprised if there was a smoking gun but there could well be lots of other conversations that shows bad faith from the PL or rival Directors towards City. Let's wait and see. That's assuming we ever see the content.

Yeah depends if there will be nda's etc.

I think as you say it's likely to show the conversations they had with other clubs. It will likely show how much pressure was placed on them.

Maybe use them to call for a fully independant regulator where this stuff can't happen.

 

[Academica]

Yes, I have as much clue as anyone.

But, realistically, the official emails won't likely be showing anything that some fans want - corruption, etc.

I mean we already know some clubs were pushing for us to be investigated and barred as they sent a bloody letter signed by them.

So what is the point of asking for them, it must be a lot of pointless work for somebody, going through them.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I think we wanted it in court though didn’t we anyway as we didn’t trust UEFA with the information? It would appear the same tactic maybe used again although maybe this time mitigation could be argued with the likes of Matt Lawton having leaks from the Premier league again which then drives up the hate towards the club?

Iirc, there were three areas of non-cooperation: things UEFA asked for in the investigation that they dropped at CAS, things that UEFA asked for which the club presented at CAS, and things UEFA didn't ask for which the club presented at CAS as evidence.

The first category wasn't proven because UEFA dropped the request, the last category wasn't proven because UEFA never asked for it, but the second was proven as a serious breach. So a fine.

We don't know what the allegation is from the PL but I am thinking it's external information which the club thinks they had no right to ask for. So not a slam dunk for the PL, maybe.

I am not sure the leaks will be relevant in the determination of any fine for non-compliance, as they weren't at CAS.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Yeah depends if there will be nda's etc.

I think as you say it's likely to show the conversations they had with other clubs. It will likely show how much pressure was placed on them.

Maybe use them to call for a fully independant regulator where this stuff can't happen.

Who cares about NDAs? There could be "leaks" again after it's all finished. ;)

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Yeah depends if there will be nda's etc.

I think as you say it's likely to show the conversations they had with other clubs. It will likely show how much pressure was placed on them.

Maybe use them to call for a fully independant regulator where this stuff can't happen.

I agree with that. This whole saga has reinforced the case for an independent regulator. Any process can never be fair when other clubs are allowed to influence investigations which could devastate their commercial rivals and benefit their own businesses. It goes against all the concepts of justice and fairness.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

So what is the point of asking for them, it must be a lot of pointless work for somebody, going through them.

I am assuming the panel has asked to see all communications so that would include What's App messages which may be more interesting.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

So what is the point of asking for them, it must be a lot of pointless work for somebody, going through them.

I think the clue is the term 'standard disclosure request'. It is a request for both parties to do so by the IC and it is standard procedure for hearings such as this seemingly.

I highly doubt the club has demanded it on the basis they will get anything beneficial to aid our case. Would be great if it did but I think it's straw clutching tbh.