PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

ayrshire_blue said:
Going to ask a question which may sound ridiculously silly. At what point do City find out what the *actual* allegations are, and not some vague, broad catch all argument? When they arrive in front of a panel? Or will the facts be laid out before then so that their own arguments can be in place prior to it reaching a panel, as like in a court of law where the accused knows exactly what he or she is supposed to have done wrong?
Click to expand...
The club know full well what the allegations are, they have been batting them away since 2018. They knew that this day was coming, so let's see what the orchestrated response is. If, like in previous investigations, they just close ranks and deny all knowledge, then it looks like the fines and penalties will be accepted. If they have something to counter argue by way of a tangible defence, then buckle up and get ready for a scrap.
 
Keeper! said:
Great book
Click to expand...
I spent the first week reading it.

And if you have a moment, just to lighten the mood. We used to get cash bonuses in envelopes every year. When the South African minority shareholders eventually took control they said "No more brown envelopes". Agreed, said we, because they had always been, and continued to be, paid in white envelopes.

Oh oh. And another. We had some subsidiary companies in some pretty wild places including Panama, which is where the bonuses came from actually. The South Africans were worried we weren't keeping proper books of account, so the FD, my "mentor", bless him, assured them all our local accounts complied fully with local regulations. What he didn't tell them was that in Panama at the time the local regulations were to keep accounting, but it didn't have to be complete or accurate.

Happy days.
 
domalino said:
I’ve counted up and I think the Mancini second contract would constitute 38 breaches out of 101.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I probably should have looked into that. 30 of the charges are apparently based just on none cooperation, I've just read.

I still think they've thought about how they wanted it pitched by the media. Not informing the club first, so the headlines could run without a response for a while, is unlikely to be a coincidence. Also, making such a fuss about non cooperation(a lot more focus on this aspect, than with the UEFA one it feels), if you think you have your proof etc. None of that says strong hand to me.
 
Last edited:
give it to gordon said:
Why cant we go back to the old days when someone can buy say Blackburn invest as much as he wants into his club ?

Seems a much simpler system
Click to expand...

Because it makes things more complicated for United and Liverpool where they have to try harder.
 
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.