PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BerkshireBlue]

I just looked at the documents de Spiegel released as I also couldn't understand this but I think the issue is RM had a contract with Al Jazira but there are bank transfers from City paying that salary .

it is but taking a £600m turnover company and arguing about the accounting of a £1.8 million payment is ridiculous if you ask me. It's next to nothing in percentage terms

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

The PL is basically the hateful 8. So they would like this to drag on

They might, they might not. The point I’m really making is that I keep reading the PL will ‘appeal’ if they don’t win. Now that really would be ridiculous. A panel they’ve appointed, listens to the evidence and finds against them and they then appeal? That then really starts to properly look like the witch hunt many people think it is.

 

[BlueBas]

I have a feeling this will come down to letter of the law vs spirit of the law. No evidence of this, just a feeling. I think Man City will have carefully followed the letter of the law but by the sounds of it may come a cropper with the spirit of the law over image rights and the company they sold the rights to (if as reported this was a vehicle for ADUG). Nothing illegal in what they did, but could possibly be considered to be owner funding that shouldn''t count towards FFP.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

Whether we clear our name or not, the damage is done and its exactly what was wanted by the other shithouse clubs behind this. Luckily, I and I'm pretty sure the majority of other blues couldn't give a flying fuck what other people think.

Ironically, rags, dips, etc are in a win win situation...we 'lose' they get what they want which is stuck mud, ickle Citeh are cheats etc etc. We 'win', they'll also get what they want which is a Super League. If City destroy the PL in court (this is what I personally believe will happen), its a hop skip and a jump to away days in Milan. PL has been played like a fiddle here.

*rolls eyes*

They're not win/win. Dickheads get to be dickheads on social media whatever the result, but if we lose we are significantly derailed: transfer embargoes, points deductions, serious fines, existing sponsorship deals null and void etc etc It'd take at the very, very least five years, if ever, to get back to the level we are at. And in that time the league will rewrite and reshape the rules to make sure that American owners are able to extract money from the UK, from our sports teams, from our match attendance and broadcasting, and from our cities. I fully accept that City are not "the good guys" here, but the consequences of us losing this are fucking terrible for the city of Manchester and Liverpool excluding the pitch those two teams play on. The people up against us have an horrific vision of what they think football should be. I'm not convinced the vision City have is "good" per se, but its a touch less grimmer than the Americans.

 

[terraloon]

well you yourself put it out in your last comment. you are being a bit obtuse on the word "serious". no one is asking you if the whole hearing will take place in the court rather if there are "serious" disputes with the way the panel is handling things. besides disagree with how interpret section 68 of the act.

The rulebook says we can challenge the result under section X.37 which can be seen below.
View attachment 68465

Section 68 of the act:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/23/section/68

Serious irregularity means an irregularity of one or more of the following kinds which the court considers has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant—

(a)failure by the tribunal to comply with section 33 (general duty of tribunal);

(b)the tribunal exceeding its powers (otherwise than by exceeding its substantive jurisdiction: see section 67);

(c)failure by the tribunal to conduct the proceedings in accordance with the procedure agreed by the parties;

(d)failure by the tribunal to deal with all the issues that were put to it;

(e)any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award exceeding its powers;

(f)uncertainty or ambiguity as to the effect of the award;

(g)the award being obtained by fraud or the award or the way in which it was procured being contrary to public policy;

(h)failure to comply with the requirements as to the form of the award; or

(i)any irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings or in the award which is admitted by the tribunal or by any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award.


reading that don't you think if the it will be pretty easy to file a case under 68(a), 68(c), 68(g), 68(i) if say the arbitration panel shafts us by being unfair in the process of examining the evidence, say if they refuse to accept our exculpatory evidence, or if they corruptly make a decision through external pressure, or if they give us a excessive punishment. it clearly says in the act that it is possible to challenge those "serious" issues. so yes you are being obtuse with the word "serious"

Sorry but it doesn’t say in x37 you can challenge the result X37 is about a challenge to the award

 

[pavelsrnicek]

It's also had a dim view taken of it before by UEFA and CAS.

We shouldn't go down the route of alleged press briefings and any KC being crooked or biased.

It will get us nowhere fast and just come across as muddying the waters.

Not to mention implying so bias on the part of the Chairman of the tribunal tends to not go down well with the chairman.

 

[JTFactsPlz]

Hope Pep wears all his PL medals on his neck for our next pre-match interview. I'll love to see the so called journalists tear their hair out as he defiantly walk into the room looking like Mr. T

It makes me legitimately sad that this will never happen.

 

[hammersmithlad]

It’s not being an Arsenal ‘fan’ I have a problem with, it’s the fact he is a season card holder. A fan can be many things, like having a team for the sake of it, or a celebrity being given one on soccer am, following the team your family does, many ‘fans’ don’t even follow that particular teams results, it’s just a label for some, there are many instances, but this fella is a SC holder and I doubt it’s just to impress clients. I know it boils down to integrity and so on, but it just feels like the PL are laughing in our faces with this appointment

Share the same view bud. As a SC holder you're actively contributing to a football club financially & commercially rather than just claiming to be a fan of a club.

Whilst I'm sure Rosen is a professional surely his appointment on a panel adds an element of doubt which any defence would be keen to exploit & question. And any prosecution would most likely seek to enter a case with any element of doubt removed to better their case.

I understand our society is littered full of football allegiances, but this isn't a case of Rosen being appointed on a panel where for example Chesterfield or Burton Albion are under scrutiny & being charged.

A historic connection to this subject chase has already been established with Arsenal leading the way initially in writing a letter to Scudmore regarding FPP so anyone in a position of power really shouldn't be associated due to a potential area of conflict.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

I have a feeling this will come down to letter of the law vs spirit of the law. No evidence of this, just a feeling. I think Man City will have carefully followed the letter of the law but by the sounds of it may come a cropper with the spirit of the law over image rights and the company they sold the rights to (if as reported this was a vehicle for ADUG). Nothing illegal in what they did, but could possibly be considered to be owner funding that shouldn''t count towards FFP.

Agreed. And all of the City board post-2012 will very, very explicitly say they have followed the rules as best they understand them, have not sought to hide anything, that similar clubs do similar things, that there has been a paper trail, that they've sought independent advise etc etc. It'll no doubt be grubby, and they might set a precedence thay we can't do it anymore, but I don't think it'll really be as meaningful as people are hoping.

 

[Kippax77]

Did we win 1 0 ? , Hendry got dogs abuse ?

Remember the fixture well but not the result because we were in the Burnley end getting acquainted with some ruffians named the Suicide Squad.

Hee the good old days