PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Annabelle?

She must have gotten out of that jam jar then.


When I see her all I can think of is Giggity mate :)

giphy.gif
 
I wonder if they asked us for third party documents, such as those relating to Etihad, and we said we don't have the jurisdiction to provide them.

The PL then marked this as being failure to cooperate.
I've long suspected this could be the case. The way they changed the APT rules to entitle themselves to third party documentation also supports this point.
 
Having read the CAS outcome when it came out, I cannot see how the substantive charges can be proven considering they adjudged there was no evidence. The bar is high and if the PL have 'evidence' of serious fraud, then they would have been duty bound to inform the SFO.

Many of the other charges will likely be disputed on technical grounds such as Mancini's contract which was signed before the PL introduced FFP rules so how can City breach rules that did not exist.

I can't see this being anything other than a big fine for not cooperating and some points deducted for possible procedural breaches which will probably be appealed in the same way Leicester won their case.

As for 100 point deductions or excluded, only somebody with a low IQ and zero understanding of commercial or corporate litigation really thinks that will happen. We will know soon enough though.
 
Having read the CAS outcome when it came out, I cannot see how the substantive charges can be proven considering they adjudged there was no evidence. The bar is high and if the PL have 'evidence' of serious fraud, then they would have been duty bound to inform the SFO.

Many of the other charges will likely be disputed on technical grounds such as Mancini's contract which was signed before the PL introduced FFP rules so how can City breach rules that did not exist.

I can't see this being anything other than a big fine for not cooperating and some points deducted for possible procedural breaches which will probably be appealed in the same way Leicester won their case.

As for 100 point deductions or excluded, only somebody with a low IQ and zero understanding of commercial or corporate litigation really thinks that will happen. We will know soon enough though.
"I can't see this being anything other than a big fine for not cooperating and some points deducted for possible procedural breaches which will probably be appealed in the same way Leicester won their case."

Leicester were guilty of breach of PPR rules hook, line and sinker, they got off because of a technicality because the PL messed up on the writing of the rules.

The only thing the PL will have a serious chance of getting us on are non cooperation, the question is will we be happy to take that hit?
 
They are Juventus, in a country where bribery and corruption is second nature.
I don't know.
After even the most cursory glance at today's headlines - and indeed Boris before Keir and the behaviour of the rest of his lot in selling contracts during Covid or the Post Office Scandal or Greenfell or Hillsborough etc etc, a fella might be forgiven should he conclude the Italians certainly don't have a monopoly on corruption as a way of life.
 

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.