PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Prestwich_Blue]

Good to hear Stefan.

But just for the knicker-wetters (and there seems to be a few) let's reiterate:
1. The Etihad allegations were all comprehensively covered at CAS.

• Etihad paid properly for their sponsorship.
• No money came from ADUG.
• Etihad paid fair value for their sponsorship.
• Etihad got fair value for their sponsorship.
• Etihad are not a related party (and it would make no difference if they were due to the above points).

I would be amazed if there was any issue with this group of charges. In fact they may be the subject of the rumours (but we don't know how true these are) that around 50 of the charges might have been dropped. The PL would need some pretty damning evidence that wasn't available to CAS to land these charges.

2. The Mancini allegations are a complete red-herring/crock of shit (delete as applicable). This was far more likely to be Mancini seeking a tax advantage of some sort (which isn't in itself illegal) than any attempt to disguise an expense. The numbers involved are completely insignificant given the scale of our losses at that time. Also likely to be time-barred anyway.

3. The Fordham stuff is the only one of the three substantive allegations where I initially thought that we might have been on dodgy ground. But then I thought about it and the point of these was to get revenue on the books in 2012/13, in order (as we thought back then) to meet the Annex XI transitional relief that we hoped would help us avoid punishment.

However they didn't, we negotiated a settlement, and UEFA were aware of Fordham around 2015, with the arrangement ending in 2017 or 2018. No charges were ever brought over Fordham and Der Spiegel's 'revelations' about the arrangement in 2018 were already a known quantity. Of course it's possible that the IC may take a different view but even if they do, the amounts involved are really insignificant.

Happy Chanukah to you and yours Stefan (and any other Jewish posters) and Happy Xmas to those who celebrate. There are things that worry me about City and our direction of travel, but the PL case isn't one of them.

Point of information. The related party question wasn't explicitly covered at CAS but, as I said, Etihad aren't a related party and even if they were it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

Just to point out (and thanks to the poster who brought it to my attention) that I meant to say that the Fordham amounts were relatively insignificant, not 'really significant', as I typed.

 

[117 M34]

Just to point out (and thanks to the poster who brought it to my attention) that I meant to say that the Fordham amounts were relatively insignificant, not 'really significant', as I typed.

It will piss me off if we are found guilty of the Fordham stuff for example, fans of other clubs will say out trophies are void because of us getting an additional £15m when in reality that wouldn't make a difference.
My argument will be if someone gave your club £15m a year, would that mean you win the league?

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

you must be fun at parties

I’m not but you make me look good.

 

[Asa's left peg]

It will piss me off if we are found guilty of the Fordham stuff for example, fans of other clubs will say out trophies are void because of us getting an additional £15m when in reality that wouldn't make a difference.
My argument will be if someone gave your club £15m a year, would that mean you win the league?

I would like to present Exhibit One, M'lord, Manchester United.

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

It will piss me off if we are found guilty of the Fordham stuff for example, fans of other clubs will say out trophies are void because of us getting an additional £15m when in reality that wouldn't make a difference.
My argument will be if someone gave your club £15m a year, would that mean you win the league?

just be like the red cartel and get interest free loans

 

[Metalartin]

I actually think there is a good argument that Rui Pinto has a vested interest in a guilty verdict for City. Even though I believe he was purely motivated by greed(extortionist), painting himself a whistleblower, doing it to expose corruption is how he'll try to justify it.

That said, I seem to remember Stefan pretty much confirmed City handed over far more documents and emails this time around, which is another reason it will take much longer to reach a conclusion. If that indeed is the case, City were likely preparing to show and explain everything Rui Pinto and his lawyers think they cooked up and more. In the end, if City are innocent, none of Pinto stuff should matter. City know what happened and say they can prove it.

 

[IrishBlueSince92]

Question. - what’s the Fordham stuff?

 

[Keith Moon]

Well, it seems to be worrying to you, everybody else just seems to be laughing at your nonsense.

So what do you mean is nonsense?

1. We don’t know what we are accused of or if there is new evidence regarding the 54 charges of Misrepresentation of Financial Information.
2. The major threat to City lies in whether the Premier League has new evidence that they have either uncovered themselves or obtained from FootyLeaks/Pinto/EIC.
3. Pinto claims that there is more material and that data has been shared with authorities.

 

[CC1]

So what do you mean is nonsense?

1. We don’t know what we are accused of or if there is new evidence regarding the 54 charges of Misrepresentation of Financial Information.
2. The major threat to City lies in whether the Premier League has new evidence that they have either uncovered themselves or obtained from FootyLeaks/Pinto/EIC.
3. Pinto claims that there is more material and that data has been shared with authorities.

All your comments have been addressed by what we regard as knowledgeable blue moon posters.
We’ve read your thoughts so can you now just go home

 

[pudge]

I'll still take winning this case over winning anything else this season but fucking Christ the decision better come quick so I can give less of a fuck about results like today

Still this