PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Coatigan]

I care.

If we genuinely breached any of the regulations, we need to take that on the chin, take whatever sanction coming from it and learn from it.

I would agree, if it was through intent or even incompetence. Anything else though, not really.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

Why is this a topic? We have enough crap and speculation in the press, we all know the private hearing will take weeks and the outcome won’t be made public for much longer. Football used to be about the games, the team that scores most wins the game, the team that ends up with most points wins the league. i am getting sick of the whole thing

What a ludicrously old school view of football.

If you can't get on top of the minutiae of accounting, various PL rules and regulations regarding clubs finances and also have a deep dive into the laws surrounding financial fraud then football is no longer for you...

 

[kaz7]

Another day closer to the truth

Think they will make something stick , question is what we will do about it

 

[M18CTID]

My first question to Masters would be Why have you charged Manchester City for things that allegedly happened 12 years ago when you didn't charge Liverpool for Hacking City's database as " It was too long ago" By the way, you have charged Manchester City for breaking EUFA FFP. Man United were found guilty by EUFA and fined for breaking FFP but not charged. Why not?

You’ve got a fair point with the Liverpool hacking stuff but regarding United breaching UEFA FFP, you need to remember that UEFA’s allowable losses are much lower than the PL’s. No other English club - including City in 2014 - who was found in breach of UEFA FFP has been charged by the PL when found in breach by UEFA because they weren’t found to be in breach of PL FFP/PSR for the equivalent monitoring period. The only reason why the PL are now levelling that at City is because they’re saying that if our accounts have been false in all the years in question then we would’ve failed UEFA FFP in multiple years when previously it was deemed we’d passed.

 

[GortonBlue62]

...all of these are hard and fast rules we either handed them in on time or we didn't there's no other way of defining the rule. If the accounts were audited then that is all that is required to pass the rules. There's no term for accuracy or good faith. These were introduced when they realised they were struggling to stop us.

Are the audited accounts, including the submission dates, of a company like Manchester City Football Club, a matter of public record?

What I'm getting at is, is it possible to be confident that we haven't failed these particular allegations because we know the club submitted on time?

 

[hcblue95]

You’ve got a fair point with the Liverpool hacking stuff but regarding United breaching UEFA FFP, you need to remember that UEFA’s allowable losses are much lower than the PL’s. No other English club - including City in 2014 - who was found in breach of UEFA FFP has been charged by the PL when found in breach by UEFA. The only reason why the PL are now levelling it at City is because they’re saying that if our accounts have been false in all the years in question then we would’ve failed UEFA FFP in multiple years.

I'm probably being thick mate but why would it matter that we've failed uefa ffp if they haven't charged any other English club for failing uefa ffp? I've been wondering that too.

 

[manimanc]

Another day closer to the truth

Think they will make something stick , question is what we will do about it

I think they really want to make something stick but will find absolutely nothing on us.
Remember khaldoon saying we have irrefutable evidence?

I believe the man 200%.

 

[M18CTID]

I'm probably being thick mate but why would it matter that we've failed uefa ffp if they haven't charged any other English club for failing uefa ffp? I've been wondering that too.

The clue is at the end of my post. If our accounts are found to be false then we’ll be retrospectively found to be in breach of UEFA FFP.

 

[halfcenturyup]

there's no other way of defining the rule.

Yes there is. In complying with each of those rules as in all other matters relating to the club's dealings with the PL, the rules have to be complied with in good faith. Once again, if the club in complying with all those rules has acted in bad faith by providing, at the very least, information it knew to be incorrect, then it has breached all of those rules. That is why the good faith rule had been added to that tranche of allegations, imho, because without it the club could say it has complied with a literal reading of those rules.

Tbh, I doubt very much that the PL's very expensive lawyers have made such a fundamental mistake in their referral that all the most serious charges can be thrown out on such a flimsy premise.

Anyway, it's bedtime for me, thank God, so I am leaving this here. I have to get up in the middle of the night to watch the match. Enjoy the game!

 

[Stoned Rose]

Simple Simon:

“We can’t ignore City are currently embroiled in a hearing looking into 115 alleged financial breaches of Premier League rules.

While we are excited for this (arse)fixture, the greatest threat to English football is the ridiculousness of the misplaced thinking behind PSR (profit and sustainability rules).

If you have an owner losing a hundred million quid a year – which, by the way, isn’t all cash losses, but also a result of things like amortisation and inability to properly market value assets - yet they are prepared to put a bond up for a billion quid, it means their club is sustainable in my book.

It leaves the PSR argument as rather ludicrous in a free market, in an industry built by people investing in ambition.

Worse than that, we are having to listen to a ridiculous crowd because a few clubs have had bad owners at the lower end of the pyramid. I do understand the angst of fans at Reading, Leyton Orient and Bury but our rules and thinking need to be more sophisticated.

Let’s build a safety net for clubs, that go bust, such as league-provided insurance policies and find a mechanism for fairer distributions.

To introduce a financial regulator, a Government appointment, to economically asphyxiate English football whilst the rest of football around the world runs free and wild and does what it wants, is utter madness.

I do believe Manchester City have a very significant case to answer though I can’t really see what they did that differently to Chelsea under Roman Abramovich, apart from timing because rules have changed”.

Behind a paywall. He must be getting info from his buddies about what way the wind is blowing regarding the 115 hearing and the current mood towards a regulator which they seem to fear.

Interesting that the PL put these “ridiculous” rules in place.

That’s hardly “acting in good faith” now is it?