PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

What I most remember about that day was that both teams agreed to not have a sponsors name on their shirts, to mark the occasion.
Then, out comes the GPC, in full chewing gum mode, as described, alongside Sven and the players, all holding hands with a child. City players had kids with the rags away kit whist the home side obviously had them in a home kit.
Never one to miss an opportunity, every child had a kit with AIG emblazoned on the front. Really got to me did that and, truth be told, still does..



View attachment 131575

That was excusable. Kids kits.

What was absolutely inexcusable was the giant “AIG remembers” banner hanging from their shithole after asking for sponsorships to be removed for the day. They just couldn’t help themselves. Grubby cunts.
 
I get the clutching at straws point, and I would say this is more about equitable application of the rules. Rule B.15.6 (2017/18) states that clubs have to comply with "the statutes and regulations of UEFA". The regulation on "good faith" appears to be specifically directed at other Clubs and the League (both which have specific definitions, for which definition of the League did change subtly around 2013).

UEFA have resolved their case against Utd and the Premier League don't see a need for further action. I suppose what I am asking is, if it is accepted that this is reasonable, should it not also be the case for City?

I was meaning UEFA presumably have a good faith rule.

Anyway, the point still stands that UEFA is responsible for determining UEFA FFP compliance, not the PL. The PL is responsible for collecting and providing the information to UEFA and clubs are required by UEFA rules, I imagine, to provide accurate and complete information in good faith. The PL can quite easily determine that City have breached those rules if they can prove City did the same to the PL, which is where the PL rule breach in respect of UEFA comes from, I think.

If we are looking for a good conspiracy, we could suggest the PL's allegations, if they can prove them, are written in such a way that UEFA have to re-open their FFP calculations for the years concerned, and punish the club for beaching their rules.

This is all hypothetical imho, though, as they won't be able to prove any of the most serious charges.
 
Reviewed the 2nd half on City+ : the "shithousery" starts 64th min. - Raya 2m10s lost ; 70th - Havertz 1m ; 72nd - Calafiori 1m30s ; 82nd Rice ( booked time wasting ) 50s ; 85th Martinelli 50s ; Gabriel 1m20s ( up to 90m ) Add on 2mins for substitutions = a minimum of 9 mins. There were other occasions when Tarquins " sat down for a rest ° and the hapless Oliver let play go on.Of course the persistent disruptions prevented City ever getting up "a head of steam" So extra time - 7 mins. Gabriel still down "injured" and play starts at 91.40 . Raya delays a goal kick ; Jesus booking 30s and City score at 97.20 in effect only 5 mins ( of the allocated 7 mins ) played. The game does kick off but then Haaland gets involved in a skirmish and Oliver blows for time. Might have been interesting if Oliver had allowed City the extra 2 mins !
Oliver couldn't wait to finish the game ...he'd lost it from about 3 seconds in and never had any control thoughout.
 
I guess that makes sense. So would the allegations in relation to UEFA rules only come into play if the other allegations were proven?
Yes. The PL would have to show we'd knowingly submitted misleading accounts for that charge (and the one relating to PSR) to stand.
 
I was meaning UEFA presumably have a good faith rule.

Anyway, the point still stands that UEFA is responsible for determining UEFA FFP compliance, not the PL. The PL is responsible for collecting and providing the information to UEFA and clubs are required by UEFA rules, I imagine, to provide accurate and complete information in good faith. The PL can quite easily determine that City have breached those rules if they can prove City did the same to the PL, which is where the PL rule breach in respect of UEFA comes from, I think.

If we are looking for a good conspiracy, we could suggest the PL's allegations, if they can prove them, are written in such a way that UEFA have to re-open their FFP calculations for the years concerned, and punish the club for beaching their rules.

This is all hypothetical imho, though, as they won't be able to prove any of the most serious charges.
No not looking for a conspiracy theory, there's plenty of those already. Just interested in understanding how the rules might work or be applied on this point. Thank you for the additional explanation.

I am also struggling to see how they would prove or gain proof that would support any of the serious allegations. My feeling is that City will have a robust explanation to refute any allegation they bring forward.
 
That was excusable. Kids kits.

What was absolutely inexcusable was the giant “AIG remembers” banner hanging from their shithole after asking for sponsorships to be removed for the day. They just couldn’t help themselves. Grubby cunts.
Especially with the context that the club treated the families of the victims with absolute distain on the back of woeful insurance until they realised they could monetised it.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.