PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Keith Moon said:
But it’s not certain. These are my points—can you please tell me where I’m wrong?

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.
Click to expand...
1. We do know with near certainty - neither party has guided the media away from explanations in the media. It’s the CAS allegations re run plus Fordham, Mancini etc and a dollop of non coop.
2. The threat to City is if they have actually carried out the alleged wholesale fraud and concealment. Btw evidence isn’t “uncovered” - they just got given it in disclosure
3. Nobody needs the Pinto docs any more. The damage was done years ago. Now the authorities have due cause to ask questions directly and require disclosure

Last reply
 
CC1 said:
But I don’t agree that you do know why people respond to these posts. Is that ok?

Happy New Year
Click to expand...
Having just read back on all his posts in the last 24 hours, I'm retracting my initial good Scrooge comments and am now going back to bad Scrooge. He's determined to fight the world with his expertise that one
 
Keith Moon said:
But it’s not certain. These are my points—can you please tell me where I’m wrong?

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.
Click to expand...
1) We know what we're accused of but not necessarily the detail behind the allegations. But it's not hard to work those out. They all must relate to information published by Der Spiegel, so that's Etihad/Etisalat, Fordham and Mancini's Al Jazira contract. Neither UEFA nor the PL can legally go on a 'fishing expedition'; they have to have specific grounds where they believe breaches may have occurred and can only request documents relating to those areas.

2) Of course it's possible the PL has evidence that UEFA/CAS didn't have but given the weight of evidence presented by us at CAS, and the lack of any cogent evidence uncovered by UEFA, I'd suggest it's highly unlikely.

If the PL had convincing new evidence proving everyone knowingly lied at CAS, we'd almost certainly have settled before the hearing.

3) If Pinto had better evidence than the seven emails then UEFA would have had it years ago. The emails were basically innuendo and completely shorn of context. And I'm not sure this case is about strength of evidence anyway, but more an attempt to blacken our reputation.

Pinto can claim what he likes but his best shot was those seven emails, two of which had to be spliced together to make them look worse than they were. And there's plenty of people claiming to be in the know telling us they know the outcome of the Independent Commission hearing even before it finished. So I'd treat peoples'' claims with great suspicion.
 
wattle said:
Having just read back on all his posts in the last 24 hours, I'm retracting my initial good Scrooge comments and am now going back to bad Scrooge. He's determined to fight the world with his expertise that one
Click to expand...

Just for good measure, let me say this on non-cooperation. We don't really know enough about the alleged non-cooperation to come to an informed opinion either way. The allegation may be proven, or it may be thrown out based on a number of factors that may or may not be relevant.

I didn't explain that very well, but one thing I can say clearly: the club won't be found not to have cooperated just to give the PL some sort of consolation win. The judgment will be totally independent of PL influence and decided on the merits.

Hope that helps a little.
 
wattle said:
Having just read back on all his posts in the last 24 hours, I'm retracting my initial good Scrooge comments and am now going back to bad Scrooge. He's determined to fight the world with his expertise that one
Click to expand...
He’s a conundrum:-) :-)
 
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.