PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

FLManc said:
Sorry.
But if everything is above board, legal, etc (which I think it is)
Why would/should we accept something that seems like a 'deal' to escape punishment for something we haven't done?
Click to expand...

Every club in the premiership could be found guilty of something, the rules are wrote in such a manner you can be got for something no matter how small.

Now we don't make the rules the PL (red cartel) do and we can't change the rules, all we can do is try to live with them. This isn't some insane fight to the death where honour and glory are left in the sand of an arena this will be a business decision based on what will hurt MCFC the least.
 
Last edited:
mexico1970 said:
Every club in the premiership could be found guilty of something, the rules are wrote in such a manner you can be got for something no matter how small.

Now we don't make the rules the PL (red cartel) do and we can't change the rules, all we can do is try to live with them. This isn't some insane fight to the death where honour and glory are left in the sand of an arena this will be a business decision based on what with hurt MCFC the least.
Click to expand...
Our Chairman has said before "we will NOT take another hit" so its a pointless debate.
 
Prophet of Doom said:
No idea where it was originally posted that a 6 point deduction was offered but it’s obviously complete bollocks.

Why would the PL offer a 6 point settlement to City at pretty much the same time they were recommending the IC punish more than that for Forest and Everton for minor PSR transgressions.
Click to expand...

Maybe because that is exactly the sort of settlement they will offer to Chelsea and, firstly, the PL aren't too confident of landing the most serious charges and, secondly, consistency in treatment of sanctions is a pretty fundamental principle.

And the rumour wasn't just a six point penalty it was a six point penalty and a substantial fine.

And the rumour didn't come from some KFA on Twitter, it came from @Prestwich_Blue who said it was second hand and so should be treated with caution.

So, do I think something like that was offered? It's possible. A lot of cases end in a settlement. Maybe the rumour was just part of the offered settlement, along with some other sporting sanctions. Who knows? But I tend to believe what Prestwich_Blue says at face value when he says anything. He has earned that right imho.
 
HorlockofFiretopMountain said:
If I recall correctly they had a bit of a sticky patch with significant losses, starting around 2016 and running for a few years. Nearly 2B USD loss in 2016 on an 8B USD turnover. This of course wouldn't have relevance to anything predating 2016, when they were running a profit.
Click to expand...

Weren't they losing billions at the time of the first sponsorship? Not that it really matters. They were funded by one of the richest governments on the planet. If they were short of 40 million, they have never needed Mansour to chip in with his petty cash.
 
Maly said:
That countdown set a lass off crying in the row in front of me, which almost set me off. It was a perfect fuck you to those bastards for that belittling sign, especially the way the day transpired

Whoever thought of it should be given the freedom of Manchester
Click to expand...
It was indeed a ‘shawshank’ moment
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.