PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[mexico1970]

Vimpto, motherfuckers!

Nearly as nice as Cresta.

 

[RodneyRodney]

I used to live in town. Never forget the ambiguous headline I saw on Shudehill billboard when it was rumoured Les Ferdinand may have been joining us:

Les says City

No comma, no speech marks.

Compare and contrast :
“Les says, ‘City’”
“Les”, says City.’

 

[cheekybids]

This non cooperation element baffles me.

If we have genuinely not provided such and such a document, or spreadsheet or witness statement, how would they be able to prove the alleged breach that relates to?
Remember the emphasis is on them to prove not us to disprove.

I get that an adverse inference could be drawn but that doesn’t necessarily amount to proof.

Also, would there be some “cut off point” for not cooperating on whatever issue? So for eg the PL say we need such and such a document by 1st May and we don’t provide it, but provide it a week later, would that still be non cooperation even though we have factually provided the document?

Would there be any criteria where not providing something is actually ok?

How can they accuse us of non-cooperation on Mancinis contract if they never spoke to Mancini or the club. Imagine we say that’s not true but you need to speak to the parties involved. If they can’t prove they made any effort then they’ve not cooperated with their own investigation.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Wiped off the face of the earth - go Pep, siege mentality

 

[deano ou812]

I'm not sure that logic or reason play much part in the PL's approach deano.

I’ll get my niece’s take on it when I’m visiting her in a few weeks she’s a sports lawyer so to speak it’ll be interesting to hear her views on this whole shambles I think she’ll come down on the side of what stefan has kept saying the burden of proof or the high bar that a number of high profile people in positions of power have committed fraud on a large scale is going to be hard to prove..

 

[cheekybids]

But surely PB the premier league’s legal advisors would be coming across with the same view would they not be advising them on this that it is a no no,they can’t be that stupid to not take proper legal advice surely and run with something that may make them look a laughing stock..

Love that. Up there with Maradona singing City at the derby.

 

[Blue Mist]

No they won’t. The PL have to show the services outlined in the Al Jazira contract, were NOT separate, and were NOT perfectly normal.

They have to show, in other words, that the contract was a sham.

Have they asked Al Jazira? Have they even asked Mancini? You can’t prove a contract is a sham unless both parties intend it should not be binding.

I’m not aware they have evidence that either didn’t intend to be bound by those terms, let alone both.

@Chris in London Mancini has previously stated that he has had no contact with the PL.
This is what I find totally amazing. Whether it is a police investigation or an internal disciplinary inquiry at Tescos, you would always look to speak to the main witness. Obviously they could lie or even refuse to speak to you but, the witness just might give you all the evidence you require.
If the PL had asked Mancini and he backed up everything they are alleging we would not now be pissing about it London.
It shows how amateurish this witch hunt really is and who is driving it.
For the record Mancini stated everything was above board and that he would attend any hearing to give evidence. Again this shows that the investigation was deliberately stretched out to cause maximum damage to City, it has no integrity.

 

[Blue_Lightsaber]

Quite incredible how much negative media coverage we get.
Don't care what the jealous haters say.
No matter what the end result is with this 115 crap, the stats and facts say we are currently the best football team on planet earth.

Just like when someone wants to migrate here.. they are migrants/ illegals..

But when we want to migrate somewhere.. we're ex-pats


City have done more to educate the whole country on it than anyone else in recorded history and you can basically sum it up with one word against our chairman and owners: RACISM

 

[halfcenturyup]

No they won’t. The PL have to show the services outlined in the Al Jazira contract, were NOT separate, and were NOT perfectly normal.

They have to show, in other words, that the contract was a sham.

Have they asked Al Jazira? Have they even asked Mancini? You can’t prove a contract is a sham unless both parties intend it should not be binding.

I’m not aware they have evidence that either didn’t intend to be bound by those terms, let alone both.

My point in the discussion I was having (iirc, it was a while ago) was that we can't just look at the literal wording of P7 and P8 and then say Mancini isn't a problem. There is, indeed, the issue of sham contract and accounting.

Yes, of course the burden of proof is on the PL, but there is evidence available in the leaked documents that would suggest the club were involved in negotiating and paying the AJ contract. Enough, I would imagine, for the Panel at least to consider the possibility of finding for the PL on the balance of probabilities. It seems to me the club have to counter that and they will quite easily and quite comprehensively by showing how the contract was separate, how it was fulfilled and accounted for internally and externally and by providing witness statements from third parties.

As for Mancini and AJ, the PL has the same problem they have for Etihad and Etisalat, as I understand it. They don't have access. All they can do is ask the club to provide third party information "when able to do so".

Perfectly willing to admit I may be wrong on any of that, though, as always. I am (thank God) no lawyer and am here to learn :)

 

[halfcenturyup]

How can they accuse us of non-cooperation on Mancinis contract if they never spoke to Mancini or the club. Imagine we say that’s not true but you need to speak to the parties involved. If they can’t prove they made any effort then they’ve not cooperated with their own investigation.

The PL may have asked the club for information from AJ and Mancini but City said they were unable to provide it. The PL can't just ask third parties for information directly, as I understand it, they can only ask City to provide it "when able to do so". Which is the biggest problem they have with all the allegations I think and, I would imagine, the main element of their non-cooperation allegation.