PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[terraloon]

Funny cheslea been shit for a few years not a threat no noise when they've sold a hotel and woman's to themselves admitted to giving players agents off the books payments so they get those players! Hazard was one of them and sold for 130m! Now would have they failed PSR if they didn't get him if it was fair!?

It’s generated less comments than cities issues but Masters made reference to their on going investigations against us.


Make of it what you will but here’s what he said

“Obviously what we're talking about is something historic; it's complicated where we have the club talking to us about things that happened under previous ownership. All I can say is that the investigation and discussions are reaching a conclusion, but until that happens, I can't say what's going to happen next."”

I am not a betting man but if I were I would put money on a settlement being agreed in advance of an IC which will be a significant ( tens of millions ) fine, a transfer embargo and possible suspended points deduction.

The PL for me are already putting a narrative out there in terms of it being complex, it being historical that the club owners as of now and not past incumbents are the ones who are dealing with.

But above all they will want our case out the way before Cities gets into full swing and whilst not a precedent in any way they , the PL , will want to send out the illusion they are “ tough” and Chelsea will probably be happy to pay over the money( £100million ) that they still are holding back from the sale

 

[terraloon]

A claim you say….

Yes just that

 

[lust overlord]

Yes just that

Yawn.

 

[terraloon]

The number of allegations referred to the disciplinary panel hasn't increased. People have just learned to read and count since the February 2023 announcement. Have another read of it. It was never 115.

I understand that and that was my first thought when I heard his claim but sorry we don’t know what is going on here but if you remember many were advocating on here that a number of those original charges had been dropped. In other words we simply don’t know

 

[citizen_maine]

I really would caution reading anything into the advance of the hearing.

We all know that a hearing was scheduled for late summer / autumn but if it is indeed a move to September then as was suggested in a report I read that it could be as simple as City, despite what has been put in the public domain, have accepted some of the charges.

Or, as Autumn starts in September, we're bang on the schedule originally given

 

[BlueMojito]

Funny cheslea been shit for a few years not a threat no noise when they've sold a hotel and woman's to themselves admitted to giving players agents off the books payments so they get those players! Hazard was one of them and sold for 130m! Now would have they failed PSR if they didn't get him if it was fair!?

Chelsea are not a threat. Jealousy is at the root of all of this.

 

[Stoned Rose]

I really would caution reading anything into the advance of the hearing.

We all know that a hearing was scheduled for late summer / autumn but if it is indeed a move to September then as was suggested in a report I read that it could be as simple as City, despite what has been put in the public domain, have accepted some of the charges.

If we’d accepted some of the breaches why would the case length have increased from 6 weeks to 10 weeks?

 

[slbsn]

I'm abit thick but ! What witnesses will the pl have ? People who use to work at City or people from our sponsors , or people from our audit companies ?

Who knows. Maybe nobody except people making very simple statements.

 

[mccity]

It is rather interesting that there's absolutely no media discussing the case as to why City maybe aren't guilty

 

[M18CTID]

I think that’s less likely for two reasons 1) Ornstein (yes I Know ) in a podcast yesterday was making the claim that the number of charges has increased and when he asked the PL about this he says they declined to comment
2) The time set aside for the hearing is now said not to be 6 weeks but 10

That's not really anything new mate. According to those who know their onions on here, it's always been 129 or 130, not 115.