PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[blueste41]

Sorry to labour the point though, but surely there aren’t any answers that can be extracted that suits the Prem as bar some bollocks emails that have been spliced together, there isn’t anything we’ve actually done wrong?

We can't know that for sure though as there simply isn't enough information in the public domain for anyone not directly involved with the case to know what evidence the PL and indeed City have. Looking at the amount of documents carted into the hearing this morning I think it's safe to assume it amounts to more than a handful of emails. The time scheduled for the hearing would also suggest there is more to contemplate than emails.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Well that is exactly what the hearing, with its thousands (or possibly millions) of documents, is there to decide.

The emails are not bollocks, though. They clearly provide a basis for investigation (indeed CAS said as much). However, proving that (a) the emails mean what the PL/City's accusers say they mean, and even if they do, that (b) the arrangements were actually implemented, is another matter entirely. Not least because if proven, you are looking at a multi party conspiracy across many years.

That was always going to be near impossible to prove at CAS, with only a few emails in evidence in a two/three day hearing. In this hearing however, over two or three months, with millions of documents and ample chance to cross examine witnesses, it will be entirely possible IF the evidence supports the charges.

In short, we on the outside simply don't know if City have done something wrong, or (if there is some doubt about that) which way the evidence points.

The club seem confident. That is good. I wouldn't be too dismissive of what the emails say, though. They are concerning.

But I’m happy to believe Khaldoon when he says “irrefutable evidence”. I completely understand your post, I’m not daft, I just can’t believe we could ever be so stupid as to leave a paper trail that gives the Prem any ounce of proof that we’ve circumnavigated the rules.

 

[blueste41]

But I’m happy to believe Khaldoon when he says “irrefutable evidence”. I completely understand your post, I’m not daft, I just can’t believe we could ever be so stupid as to leave a paper trail that gives the Prem any ounce of proof that we’ve circumnavigated the rules.

Lets be honest, the PL must have something tangible or we wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a 12 week hearing and a 3 month adjournment to find a verdict. But in the same way that those insist we are guilty have no idea if that is actually true we have no idea of our innocence.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

The club seem confident. That is good. I wouldn't be too dismissive of what the emails say, though. They are concerning.

I think it may have been Stefan who said on here a long time ago that often in these sorts of cases, both sides can often be extremely confident in their own respective position but obviously only one side will win the day based on the evidence heard/read.

For that reason, the noises of confidence within the club doesn't do too much to increase my own, I think it's best not to pay too much attention to that side of things.

My confidence purely comes from the scale of the allegations which we are facing. They just don't seem plausible let alone provable.

 

[mancboy]

Whenever you have a moment of doubt just tell yourself this, since our owners came they have hired the best in every area to carry out their plan and brought about a team the likes of which the pl has never seen before and they did all that with a cartel trying every dirty trick in the book to try and stop them, why would they not do exactly what theyve done all along now.

If you want even further clarification our owners can point to 12 years of success for evidence of our owners keeping their word, the pl can point to richard masters a man with so little self respect he took a job that 4 much better qualified candidates publicly rejected.

 

[HolisticJim]

But I’m happy to believe Khaldoon when he says “irrefutable evidence”. I completely understand your post, I’m not daft, I just can’t believe we could ever be so stupid as to leave a paper trail that gives the Prem any ounce of proof that we’ve circumnavigated the rules.

In fairness he was never going to say 'loose evidence which might help' was he.

 

[mike1923]

It make me feel much more confident about our future.
But just curious, why there's zero chance that we will get 100 point deductions? (yeah, I actually has zero understanding of commercial and corporate litigation, I have to admit).

Sporting sanctions would be for us gaining an advantage by any misdemeanours

Everton overspent - they gained an advantage on their sporting rivals who stayed within the rules. So they were given a sporting sanction ie a points deduction, presumably to “level the field’’ and discourage others from breaching the spending rules

In order for us to be deducted 100 points, I imagine it would have to be proven that we gained an enormous sporting advantage by breaking the rules

If/when the non co-operation charges are the only thing left on the table (if even they are) we won’t be deducted points because telling the premier league to fuck off hasn’t given us a sporting advantage

At least that’s all logical to me, but fuck knows

 

[Bez]

Thought of the day. The PL are a bunch of red cartel lackeys who threw the dice erroneously in February 2023 when under duress from key stakeholders. The red cartel have got what they wished for. Will they like the outcome though? Not that press are reporting it this way, but these are also very dangerous times for the PL and the red mafia. Could be a one way ticket to oblivion! Now that's a story that won't be reported.

 

[Champions again in 2012]

I think I’d prefer for us to be found guilty of all charges. But when they punish us we only get a paltry £1m fine.

FIned a million and saddled with the premier leagues legal costs, as i am sure that would happen if found guilty on all charges. No part of me wants us to be guilty of anything, even non co-operation. I think that non co-operation could be the one area we take some sort of hit on though.

If we are found guilty i would dread to think of the damage done to the reputation of some of our senior execs and owner

 

[dadnlad]

In fairness he was never going to say 'loose evidence which might help' was he.

they'd do a deal though