PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[johnnytapia]

Er… I can’t remember the unusual feature of our 1981 win v Norwich. ???

After Bobby Mac got the 6th the ref blew for full time without allowing Norwich to restart the game (and then blowing).

 

[halfcenturyup]

If the Premier League, prior to disclosure, obtained another Pinto-hacked document that proves we inflated our sponsorship, would this be considered irrelevant as evidence?

I'll play.

It doesn't matter.

Firstly, because any information he has won't prove anything. It's just correspondence. Otherwise CAS would have found the club in breach and the club would have settled with the PL a long time ago.

Secondly, there is nothing Pinto can tell the PL about "inflated sponsorships", because they will have already had access to all the information he has in relation to the AD sponsorships, and much much more, directly from the club. He can't possibly have anything new on that issue that would be of use.

Thirdly, it's all hypothetical because he didn't share all this apparently relevant incriminating evidence with UEFA in 2019 or 2020 and since then he hasn't been in control of the data (and, once again, there is no way criminal investigative authorities are distributing illegally gained material to a private party in a civil dispute with another private party). There is no window where the suggestion makes any sense.

I don't know why you have this infatuation with Pinto. The point you raised later about the PL having more evidence than UEFA is a valid one, but it is just so obvious and has been addressed many times already.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

at the end of the day anything can happen. What is for sure is Pinto's hacked data is not used at all as it's not needed the PL have everything anyway. Whether the PL have the evidence to suggest multiple independent companies, probably in the region of 10 or so, have all colluded together to commit financial fraud for no apparent reason seems very far fetched. Will the PL be able to convince the IC that it happened? possibly but I doubt it. They might have evidence of some other small adminy things, like player contract stuff, that might warrant a few points deduction but who knows it's anyones guess.

 

[johnny crossan]

at the end of the day anything can happen. What is for sure is Pinto's hacked data is not used at all as it's not needed the PL have everything anyway. Whether the PL have the evidence to suggest multiple independent companies, probably in the region of 10 or so, have all colluded together to commit financial fraud for no apparent reason seems very far fetched. Will the PL be able to convince the IC that it happened? possibly but I doubt it. They might have evidence of some other small adminy things, like player contract stuff, that might warrant a few points deduction but who knows it's anyones guess.

Just a minor quibble but "at the end of the day anything can happen" is a little extreme.

 

[Protein Junkie]

Since this thread has descended into nonsense, I've always wanted to ask what erudite means.

You’ll have to ask @gordondaviesmoustache :-)

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

at the end of the day anything can happen. What is for sure is Pinto's hacked data is not used at all as it's not needed the PL have everything anyway. Whether the PL have the evidence to suggest multiple independent companies, probably in the region of 10 or so, have all colluded together to commit financial fraud for no apparent reason seems very far fetched. Will the PL be able to convince the IC that it happened? possibly but I doubt it. They might have evidence of some other small adminy things, like player contract stuff, that might warrant a few points deduction but who knows it's anyones guess.

I think this is the point. It is as though "on the balance of probabilities" makes (hacked) emails much more credible "on the balance of probabilities" while, at the same time it make our accounts, duly audited, and all the testimony, from reputable and respected sources, much less credible "on the balance of probabilities". To quote Sir Humphrey, "that would be a very courageous decision minister."

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

Has anyone ever considered there maybe unknown unknowns, and that no-one knows about them apart from @Keith Moon, but nobody knows who he is. Even worse, didn't anyone else know Lord Pannick is now a known Arsenal season ticket holder. Did Khaldoon know about that before we employed him. Who knows ?

 

[CC1]

Has anyone ever considered there maybe unknown unknowns, and that no-one knows about them apart from @Keith Moon, but nobody knows who he is. Even worse, didn't anyone else know Lord Pannick is now a known Arsenal season ticket holder. Did Khaldoon know about that before we employed him. Who knows ?

Hilarious - if he’s a KNOWN Gunner…….
Think everyone who matters knew he was an Arsenal fan. Hardly something he hid - he’s visible every time he goes to watch them

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Our beloved super legal eagle, whom I respect very much, misunderstood what I meant in one of my posts (probably my fault) and replied a couple of times that I didn’t understand disclosure and that I didn’t understand that the Pinto documents were irrelevant after the hearing. This, in turn, triggered some posters to unleash their inner cyber bullies. I never had any intent to wind anyone up.

No but you are. And you continue to. And having been informed that you are wide of the mark, you double down, further annoying people.

Its not as if what you're saying is something to listen to, knowledgeable etc. Maybe at first it was..
we all like pertinent information in here, from people who have knowledge. it's the main reason we come to this thread, to get updates. You are providing the opposite of that, with a hint of hoping you are right, that City will be found massively guilty.

 

[Ric]

I know there’s not much new to discuss at the moment, but let’s at least try and keep the thread on track. Have removed a few pages of nonsense to try and stop it getting derailed further.