John Wayne
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2007
- Messages
- 3,527
Aye. 24 years, and we're still here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Don't worry about herWho the fuck is Alice?
She's all smokie and mirrors
This bit isn't true. The High Court case wasn't about co-operation and nor did the judge draw any such conclusion largely because he wasn't asked to or shown any evidence of that case. "Abundantly clear" is simply not true.Well, this is from our dearest friend Mr Nick Harris. Interesting read though. Seems like he's not that confident. I wonder what changed lately....?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Man City - what will the verdict be?
...
I don’t think there is any doubt at all that City have failed to co-operate with the Premier League. A High Court judge made this abundantly clear in 2021 when myself and colleagues from the MoS, assisted by a QC, effectively won the right to report on City’s dawdling.
Salford_Blue
Well-Known Member
I'm so thankful that I'm not on twatter anymore.
Same here pal.
With that orange clown getting in and the 115 shite, I really was constantly anxious and angry.
Once he was confirmed winner, I deleted it.
I missed it at first but don't anymore
It appears that Nick Harris, as is his way, wishes to pollute the narrative with the stench of 'we know they're guilty but it's proving it that is the issue'. This keeps the atmosphere around the club a negative one, and feeds the fans of the cartel with the information they need. It is for this reason that I feel that any failure of the PL to find guilt needs to be come with a boatload of PR from the club finally ending the matter.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
I see Harris still believes City were "caught and punished" for financial breaches on two occasions. I presume he is referring to the 2013 settlement we made with UEFA (with no admission of liability) and has conveniently ignored the fact that we were cleared of the second UEFA allegations by CAS. In the second instance we deliberately and publically withdrew co-operation with UEFA because of their naked corrupion in leaking information to the media. CAS reduced the UEFA non-operation fine to just £10m. So just the usual tissue of lies from the man who says he "doesn't hate City."Well, this is from our dearest friend Mr Nick Harris. Interesting read though. Seems like he's not that confident. I wonder what changed lately....?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Man City - what will the verdict be?
This question came via DM on social media from somebody calling themselves ‘Bert’, and I can only assume they are a Manchester City fan. They said they know I hate City (not actually true) but they would be interested in my opinion about whether City will be found guilty and punished in the “115 case”, where closing arguments were heard last Friday.
As I have repeatedly written, and said, I have zero confidence in any prediction, and I think the outcome could range from City effectively being cleared of all charges to City being found guilty of many, but not all. Which means potential punishments ranging from a fine (for non-cooperation with the Premier League probe, which we know is a slam dunk, albeit a minor one) to a points reduction big enough to relegate them.
I honestly cannot say with any confidence which of these outcomes will happen.
For new readers or those who haven’t kept abreast of developments, you might be interested in pieces from recent months about new details of City’s financial chicanery over the years, or how City have tried to shape the 115 narrative with the help of client journalists, and how we got here in the first place as the 10-week independent commission began.
As for my best prediction on the outcome: I have no inside knowledge of what has happened at the commission hearings. I don’t know the full list of witnesses or what they said. I assume City will have used similar tactics they used when getting a two-year Champions League ban overturned at CAS in 2020. They obviously will not have provided information that would incriminate themselves, and instead left it to the Premier League to prove the most significant charges, of disguised investment.
I don’t believe the Premier League will have had any jurisdiction to access financial records of Etihad’s income. So even if City produce records showing Etihad did indeed pay for City sponsorships, there won’t be any ability to see if Etihad did so after having been funded to do so by a UAE government source.
The Mancini and Yaya Toure payments look damning as far as the leaked emails show (links to all documents in pieces linked above), but again there is an element of subjectivity involved.
I don’t think there is any doubt at all that City have failed to co-operate with the Premier League. A High Court judge made this abundantly clear in 2021 when myself and colleagues from the MoS, assisted by a QC, effectively won the right to report on City’s dawdling.
I think it’s important to understand that City have already been caught and punished, twice, for breaking various UEFA and Premier League financial rules. It is abundantly clear what they did. We have been writing about it, with evidence, for a decade.
But I’m not confident the Premier League will have delivered the burden of proof required. I think City will be punished, certainly with a fine, probably with some points deductions. Am I confident they will be hit with sanctions that will relegate them? No.
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
It appears that Nick Harris, as is his way, wishes to pollute the narrative with the stench of 'we know they're guilty but it's proving it that is the issue'. This keeps the atmosphere around the club a negative one, and feeds the fans of the cartel with the information they need. It is for this reason that I feel that any failure of the PL to find guilt needs to be come with a boatload of PR from the club finally ending the matter.
Don t worry, apparently we have "client journalists" pumping out positive articles. Wish he'd named them all.
manimanc
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell here's Alice with the full story of the charges - might as well delete the previous 7000-odd pages of this thread then
Bedsit Alice who has one eye facing North and the other facing west?
Bedsit Alice who has never been to the shithole in her life?
What? She's hoodwinked everyone and has in fact been studying law and sports financial regulations without anybody knowing?
Somebody forward this on to Khaldoon immediately, he must know this new evidence at once.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
Yes our "client journalists" seem to have kept a low profile over the last 10 years when we have been vilified in one of the most hateful smear campaigns sport has ever seen. I can honestly only recall a handful of articles defending City over the allegations in the last decade and they were from Martin Samuel, one of the most respected sports jourrnalists in the UK.Don t worry, apparently we have "client journalists" pumping out positive articles. Wish he'd named them all.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,350
Surely if it’s been on the accounts the last 2 years it would be on the accounts this year unless we knew positive outcome for city
Not "know" but could convince the auditors.
And not a "positive" outcome, but not a significantly negative outcome. Which to me means the management and directors are still confident that the most serious issues will be successfully refuted and, together with their lawyers, they were able to convince the auditors of that.