PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[jrb]

Following the publication of the Times’ report, the FA launched an investigation into whether misconduct rules had been broken.

However, English football’s governing body has now confirmed that the disciplinary process has ended with action being deemed unnecessary.

A spokesperson said: “The FA carefully considered the evidence received in this matter, including information provided by both clubs involved, and has decided not to progress the investigation.

“This is due to a number of factors including the age of the alleged concerns and the settlement agreed by the two clubs involved.

“As per standard protocol, should the FA receive further information or evidence, the decision not to progress the investigation may be reviewed.”

 

[jrb]

As far as I know the 'hack' was just City not removing the permissions for old employees. They logged in using their old credentials from when they were employed by City. This is a pretty embarrassing security oversight by us imo and probably why we were happy to settle for a low amount. If they had hired some shady hacker to access our database then I'm sure we would have taken it further.

Mistake or not, what the 2 ex City staff members did was known about by LFC and no action was taken against the 2 ex City staff members by LFC. People can make up their own minds about the way LFC acted.

Sporting director Michael Edwards and two former City employees, Julian Ward and Dave Fallows, were named in the subsequent settlement.

Julian Ward has returned to LFC and taken a position with Fenway Sports Group as technical director. This year.

 

[paulchapo]

This is what Khaldoon was referring to when he spoke of "the tyranny of the majority". Lord Salisbury touched on the same principle when he explained that a free society was not one where six men (!) had the right to tell five men what they must do. Most free societies have a declaration of fundamental rights which must not be infringed by new laws. The PL's constitution includes no such limitations and a two thirds vote of members can enact any new rules. Thus (as proposed by our neighbours from Stretford) the PL voted for FFP rules which limit severely the right of owners and shareholders to invest in their club, despite a prohibition on such limitations being expressed clearly in law. City have taken proceedings against APT on the grounds that they conflict with the laws of the land. The complication in this case is that City are not accused of breaking these unenforceable rules but of avoiding them by unquestionably unlawful ways. City's defence is, however, the only one possible: we haven't done it and we can answer all charges with "irrefutable" evidence.

Exactly this and which is why I've said all along that UEFA's ffp rules should have been challenged in a European court of law when they first imposed them. I understand why we didn't. We were trying to be accepted and didn't want to rock the boat. Also we had just about got into the elite boat before they pulled the gangway up. The same as the premier league. In hindsight now the club probably realises this was the wrong approach. The relentless persecution and slandering of our club I'd say has been unprecedented in the history of football. It's an utter disgrace the way we have been treated, just because we upset their cosy little monopoly.

As for voting for all these restrictive rules, the old guard of course would vote for them. So would the make up the numbers clubs with unambitious owners. It's a perfect excuse to say they can't invest because of these rules. Only now have the thick as pigshit fans of other clubs woken up to the fact that it's not fair and has condemned them forever to probably never seeing their club compete for or win trophies. It took them long enough after years of slagging us off. Even now a lot of the sheep are still bleating "What about City???"
The more enlightened ones have realised we are not the enemy, we never have been.
Fuck the lot of them. I hope we blow the whole stinking corrupt premier league to smithereens and if we ruin the red cartel in the process all the sweeter.

 

[Gazza]

Let’s be honest. If City wanted to take the Scouse hacking further, they could have. City decided to settle out of court with a pay off. We’ll never know the reason why. The PL were happy with that. City could have absolutely slaughtered Henry and Liverpool in court. But City decided not to do that. Yet all along Henry and Liverpool have been behind the constant and under handed smear campaign and attacks against City. Very strange decision by City.

TBF John Henry does have a history of cheating;-

Red Sox aren’t only John Henry-owned team with a scandal; Liverpool has a 'hacking' incident

There's now another cheating scandal for a John Henry-owned team.

www.masslive.com

 

[BlueRockape]

Mistake or not, what the 2 ex City staff members did was known about by LFC and no action was taken against the 2 ex City staff members by LFC. People can come to their own minds about the way LFC acted.

Sporting director Michael Edwards and two former City employees, Julian Ward and Dave Fallows, were named in the subsequent settlement.

Why we didn't go after the Scouse cunts I will never understand

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

As far as I know the 'hack' was just City not removing the permissions for old employees. They logged in using their old credentials from when they were employed by City. This is a pretty embarrassing security oversight by us imo and probably why we were happy to settle for a low amount. If they had hired some shady hacker to access our database then I'm sure we would have taken it further.

My understanding is that they used the credentials of an existing employee. It's also possible that City were negligent in some way. But it shouldn't matter, as the old employees committed a criminal offence, whatever credentials they used.

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

Let’s be honest. If City wanted to take the Scouse hacking further, they could have. City decided to settle out of court with a pay off. We’ll never know the reason why. The PL were happy with that. City could have absolutely slaughtered Henry and Liverpool in court. But City decided not to do that. Yet all along Henry and Liverpool have been behind the constant and under handed smear campaign and attacks against City. Very strange decision by City.

I thought the reason we didn't go further with Liverpool was we would be equally to blame as we had obligations to keep data safe under whichever Act covers it. I might be wrong but I'm sure it was explained fully on here why we didn't and it was along those lines.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Mistake or not, what the 2 ex City staff members did was known about by LFC and no action was taken against the 2 ex City staff members by LFC. People can make up their own minds about the way LFC acted.

Sporting director Michael Edwards and two former City employees, Julian Ward and Dave Fallows, were named in the subsequent settlement.

Julian Ward has taken a position with Fenway Sports Group as technical director. This year.

Two of them were later promoted by LFC which says a lot about the ethics at that club.

 

[Matt Diablo]

Man City Till I Die - Facebook

Lord Pannick KC who’s leading the City group in representing Manchester City vs the Premier League was pictured smiling outside the International Dispute Resolution Centre earlier YESTERDAY when he came out of court.

Does that smile make you think we are about to lose the biggest case in sports history? No because we have the best representing us.

View attachment 132257

and we simply aint guilty

 

[thismeansfour]

That simply doesn't make sense. City Liverpool and a couple of London clubs could all make a similar amount from a pre season tour and yet, according to you, they all, for some unknown reason under declared. Why would they do that?

Not according to me, according to the financial expert mate.