PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Scott mcfc]

… and breathe

I breathe fine u tool

 

[Cobwebcat]

So many journalists either simply don’t understand the CAS verdict, or deliberately misrepresent it.

I think it’s both. It’s no wonder your average fan assumes we are guilty. They don’t have the inclination to read the CAS verdict themselves so rely on journalism to inform them. They have done a shocking job.

 

[manimanc]

So many journalists either simply don’t understand the CAS verdict, or deliberately misrepresent it.

What, a journalist not telling the correct story?

I'm shocked I tell thee.

You'll be saying water is wet next.

 

[Scott mcfc]

​

The PL wanted Everton to pay the legal costs. The cheeky f*ckers.

If the PL lose against City the costs will be paid by the PL and other 19 PL clubs. That won't go down well with the Red Shirt Cartel clubs. :-)

What about legal costs?​

This specific case is six years in the making, so legal fees on both sides are already estimated at tens of millions of pounds before the hearing even starts.

Expect whichever side 'wins' to make a claim for costs.

For context, the Premier League wanted Everton to pay the full £4.9m legal costs of their first PSR six-point deduction case from last season.

Everton's lawyer Celia Rooney told the appeal that those figures were “frankly eye-watering”.

However, an appeal board ruled Everton should pay £1.7m and the Premier League cover the remaining £3.2m legal fees.

Any costs being paid by the Premier League at the end of the City case would have to be spread across the 20 clubs which make up the league.

Man City hearing: Premier League 115 charges case begins

The hearing into Manchester City's 115 charges for alleged breaches of the Premier League's financial rules begins on Monday.

www.bbc.co.uk

Suppose thats one way of us gettin our own back,hitting them in there pockets,ill take that

 

[nmc]

What on earth is M Ogadon on about?

The Football Leaks material formed the basis of UEFA's action against City, but after finding the club guilty and imposing a two-year Champions League ban, UEFA's decision was then overturned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) because the alleged offences were "time-barred" by UEFA's five-year statute of limitations.

Man City vs. Premier League: 115 charges, but what's at stake?

The hearing into Man City's 115 alleged breaches of Premier League financial rules begins Monday, and the ramifications could be huge.

www.espn.com

Ogden. Never one to let the facts get in the way…..

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

If they try to get us to pay a share of their costs, we should tell them to fuck off. You just know they will do that, the arseoles

This point will doubtless be addressed when dealing with costs at the end, given that section 61(2) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (assuming applicable here) expressly states costs should follow the event. City can’t be expected to help fund the other side in a litigation they have prevailed in, especially as if we lose we’ll have to pick up the tab (or much of it) for the other 19 clubs. It’s probably already been covered off between the parties, or is expressly provided for in the PL rules - unless it comes out of some nebulous pot, I guess.

Fuck knows!

 

[Rammy Blue]

What, a journalist not telling the correct story?

I'm shocked I tell thee.

You'll be saying water is wet next.

Water isn’t wet though.

 

[nmc]

Can they tap out?

They won’t because the Red Cartel won’t let them… and when this hopefully goes tits up for them they will walk away like it’s nothing to do with them…. It’s all that idiot Masters.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

City have put their money where their mouth is by investing hundreds of millions on infrastructure.

Again it doesn't change my outlook. I'd expect a business as usual approach regardless. Club confidence, investment in infrastructure, it's just noise imo. It'll be a long hearing and the PL have a mountain to climb to prove guilt, they may do so but we'll see.

 

[nmc]

So many journalists either simply don’t understand the CAS verdict, or deliberately misrepresent it.

The former facilitates the latter.