PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Stoned Rose]

As the Season opens I really am struggling to raise any enthusiasm for it.
The shadow of this enquiry has sucked the joy out of football in general as it becomes apparent how deep the dislike of our club has penetrated the sport thanks to the the poisonous drip drip drip of media venom against us . Fans of the big 4 to the lowliest club giving us shit about how we stole all our trophies and should be condemned to the lower leagues. I speak to people I would consider rational human beings but they too have been brainwashed by the constant undermining of Manchester City FC.
We are the bastard prince never to be recognised for the power we fought for.
Only a total acquittal will clear our name and legacy - we know that is never going to happen and anything less will hang around us like a bad stink for years as all our achievements are forever tarnished by this campaign of hate.
We usurped the cartel and will never be forgiven .We challenged a corrupt system designed to protect them and throw clubs like City an occasional scrap from the top table,
I suspect we may have had to bend rules because there was no other way to force our way into a position to take on the mafia family of legacy clubs.
The media and the League are still their attack dogs and will never give us a moments peace.
So no forgive me for not being enthused at season 2024/5 and what we may or may not achieve.

 

[kippaxed54]

Looked again at this charge in light of some things yesterday

View attachment 128574

regarding "the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager"

None of Q7/Q8/P7/P8 required anything but disclosure of the managers contract (example here) - the rule did not say "full details" of manager remuneration/contracts (plural). It said merely:

View attachment 128576

It did not require disclosure of all agreements a shareholder may have directly or indirectly with the manager. That came in 21/22 in a new rule presumably because it was accepted that the drafting before did not capture such agreements.
View attachment 128578
In highly unique Mancini (hmmm) scenario, it is also interesting to consider the 1999-2004 saga between Ferguson and, shareholder, Magnier. Because in 2004, Ferguson entered into a £2.5m (net) settlement https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/mar/09/newsstory.manchesterunited with the then 29% shareholder in United. This payment to the manager was never disclosed in United's accounts even though it would have represented approximately 8-10% of United's entire wage bill (grossed up). I guess the PL will want to go back and charge United if they prevail on Mancini...what?
View attachment 128577

Learn a lot (I think) from the contributions from @slbsn in here and elsewhere. Even if we're found "guilty" (e.g. on the 'non-co-operation' charges), his public contributions have helped me push back on Blues-baiters, and given me hope!
Thankyou!

 

[dadnlad]

Looked again at this charge in light of some things yesterday

View attachment 128574

regarding "the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager"

None of Q7/Q8/P7/P8 required anything but disclosure of the managers contract (example here) - the rule did not say "full details" of manager remuneration/contracts (plural). It said merely:

View attachment 128576

It did not require disclosure of all agreements a shareholder may have directly or indirectly with the manager. That came in 21/22 in a new rule presumably because it was accepted that the drafting before did not capture such agreements.
View attachment 128578
In highly unique Mancini (hmmm) scenario, it is also interesting to consider the 1999-2004 saga between Ferguson and, shareholder, Magnier. Because in 2004, Ferguson entered into a £2.5m (net) settlement https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/mar/09/newsstory.manchesterunited with the then 29% shareholder in United. This payment to the manager was never disclosed in United's accounts even though it would have represented approximately 8-10% of United's entire wage bill (grossed up). I guess the PL will want to go back and charge United if they prevail on Mancini...what?
View attachment 128577

Unless I've miss reading it they'll just deny it and it'll be swept under carpet and filed under too far back to investigate

 

[HelloCity]

We can pull all of this stuff together, we can lay it out in front of them and provide details but what is the point.
The Premier League have us guilty as charged, the media definitely have us guilty as charged as do half the usual suspects in the league.
There is nothing else to point out or to highlight that will change anyone's mind and the thing is there will be something else to beat us with once this is settled.

Yeah, no.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

6. None co-operation
City say they have co-operated by the sheer volume of material supplied to the PL that rebutts their allegations but the details of alleged none co-operation by the PL are not listed and each (35 at least) will be argued out in front of the panel and it will be for them to decide such matters.
In any event if in some matters City have been none co-operative it will have been on legal advice for good reason and we would have to face the financial penalty for so doing. There is no sporting advantage from such breaches therefore no sporting sanction (points reduction etc) can be attributed to those charges.

You must have missed my post from the other day. We can only go off past charges of non co-operation and there's only been one, Evertons. They were found guilty of it and were given a 4 point penalty deduction for it. Remember the commission said in the Everton's case that a financial penalty is not appropriate for rich teams only sporting sanctions will be considered (sounds like discrimination if you ask me). That was for Everton imagine how rich they consider City to be. Everton managed to get the 4 points back on appeal due to not actually being charged for it in the first place. This was a major fuck up from the Premier League and the original commission but I question whether they did this for preparation for our case (tin foil hat stuff maybe). So make no mistake about it if we're found guilty on the non coperation charges we will be deducted points it's just a question of how many.

 

[give it to gordon]

we all do but the PL have no morals; they & their so called independent panel are corrupt; & they will do whatever it takes to win

Whilst that thought does linger in my head. Agree the pl is bent no doubt about that.
But when you look at things with a calm head, the thought of serious business people willing to risk their reputations for little City doesnt make sence. These aren't just serious business people in their own country but on the world stage.
They have invested billions into the UK, Etihad Airways were really smart in sponsor of City both companies have grown because of this.

The pl is run by small fry people who don't understand big business. Masters is totally out of his depth, 5th choice for the job after being vetted by dippers and rags.

Part of me thinks the pl HAVE to find City guilty because if they don't the damage to the pl could be final. Have the pl really gone ahead even after CAS because the 3 red tops +1 have wanted this ?
If so it shows how weak the chairman of the pl is. But he was vetted by two of those clubs.

The American owners are a real threat to our game. They take money out of the game, they don't invest much into the clubs. They want a closed shop league. They want games played in American.

The one thing that does confuse me is that other fans can't see this manager.

I believe in our owner and our club, we are hated because our owners are not white American, it is that simple.

This non cooperation shit is farcical, who can you give our all your books and information when you know its going straight to the 3 red tops +1. How ?

The pl do 'kick it out' in October, the pl shirt have kick out racism of the shirts. But the pl do fuck all to stop racism aimed at clubs and club owners.

I believe City are 100% innocent do I believe the IC will agree with me 50/50. I don't trust the pl and I don't trust an IC.

 

[Metal Biker]

As the Season opens I really am struggling to raise any enthusiasm for it.
The shadow of this enquiry has sucked the joy out of football in general as it becomes apparent how deep the dislike of our club has penetrated the sport thanks to the the poisonous drip drip drip of media venom against us . Fans of the big 4 to the lowliest club giving us shit about how we stole all our trophies and should be condemned to the lower leagues. I speak to people I would consider rational human beings but they too have been brainwashed by the constant undermining of Manchester City FC.
We are the bastard prince never to be recognised for the power we fought for.
Only a total acquittal will clear our name and legacy - we know that is never going to happen and anything less will hang around us like a bad stink for years as all our achievements are forever tarnished by this campaign of hate.
We usurped the cartel and will never be forgiven .We challenged a corrupt system designed to protect them and throw clubs like City an occasional scrap from the top table,
I suspect we may have had to bend rules because there was no other way to force our way into a position to take on the mafia family of legacy clubs.
The media and the League are still their attack dogs and will never give us a moments peace.
So no forgive me for not being enthused at season 2024/5 and what we may or may not achieve.

It's alright mate, I feel the same.
Five in a row will be fought at every angle by every corner of the media. Already the narrative is about "two-time runners up Arsenal pushing Manchester City". The media has clearly chosen their champions elect, and until these charges are settled it will follow the players and fans around every game.

I suppose it's one of the reasons i've been hoping for the positive news about City suing the PL being announced already; something to go into battle with against the dimwitted. Having the same conversation over and over, raising the factual points with others gets tedious. Talk of "115" is going to dominate any football discussion about City from now until January and it's genuinely getting boring talking about it. So, like you, I don't have much enthusiasm about this season, expecting TV coverage to mention 115 at least ten times during matches, whilst watching Haaland miss another sitter.

It just feels like limbo. Manchester City right now are about the "115 charges", not about how well they play football.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

United and Liverpool, They should ask Everton how much they will take for the one from Goodison

There's a sale on in Harvey Normans.
Free air fryer with every purchase over £500 too.

 

[Newman Noggs]

It's alright mate, I feel the same.
Five in a row will be fought at every angle by every corner of the media. Already the narrative is about "two-time runners up Arsenal pushing Manchester City". The media has clearly chosen their champions elect, and until these charges are settled it will follow the players and fans around every game.

I suppose it's one of the reasons i've been hoping for the positive news about City suing the PL being announced already; something to go into battle with against the dimwitted. Having the same conversation over and over, raising the factual points with others gets tedious. Talk of "115" is going to dominate any football discussion about City from now until January and it's genuinely getting boring talking about it. So, like you, I don't have much enthusiasm about this season, expecting TV coverage to mention 115 at least ten times during matches, whilst watching Haaland miss another sitter.

It just feels like limbo. Manchester City right now are about the "115 charges", not about how well they play football.

Hang in there, we're on the last lap now. APT decision soon (this week, if Ziegler is correct) and 115 in January. Just think of the fun you'll have if these go our way.

 

[PPT]

You must have missed my post from the other day. We can only go off past charges of non co-operation and there's only been one, Evertons. They were found guilty of it and were given a 4 point penalty deduction for it. Remember the commission said in the Everton's case that a financial penalty is not appropriate for rich teams only sporting sanctions will be considered (sounds like discrimination if you ask me). That was for Everton imagine how rich they consider City to be. Everton managed to get the 4 points back on appeal due to not actually being charged for it in the first place. This was a major fuck up from the Premier League and the original commission but I question whether they did this for preparation for our case (tin foil hat stuff maybe). So make no mistake about it if we're found guilty on the non coperation charges we will be deducted points it's just a question of how many.

And that will fit the narrative perfectly. We didn't cooperate, because we had things to hide so we hid them. Therefore we are corrupt and "we told you so". The media pile-on continues unabated and all of our achievements, successes and reputation are forever tarnished. I could see a 15 to 20-point deduction, reduced to 10 on appeal. Mission accomplished by the red-shirted cartel clubs and the PL.