PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Woody135]

good post mate and spells out exactly the nature of the challenge. Either they are saying we and our auditors have cheated on a massive scale (that would be unique in UK sport), or that the sponsorship has come indirectly from HRH the Sheik. In that second option, surely the auditor would also have to ensure that any sponsorship over £10m was compliant within FP rules of the time?

I just find this whole charge over such a prolonged period so unbelievable that its not easy to come to any other conclusion that the PL are utterly, utterly corrupt and are simply the mouthpiece of a band of rival/enemy clubs who will distance themselves as soon as it becomes clear the charges will largely fail. (and set up a new Super League).

Yes the auditor signs off the accounts to companies house and a separate report (of similar information) to PL on compliance with FFP rules. Hence they are saying everything was lawful, appropriate and accurate with those rules.

They can not confirm 100% where the cash came from. That for me is the only potential point of contention.

However at CAS City brought the CEO of Etihad as a witness. No doubt he said Etihad paid it (or at least arranged for payment and booked the costs) and it was fair. I find it hard for anyone to then rule against that in my opinion. No doubt similar would happen for other deals.

I dont think this is corruption. I just think this is PL saying we dont believe you and although we may not be able to prove it we are going to charge you anyway and see what happens. Whether that motive is due to pressure from the other clubs or a self entitled sense of responsibility by the PL is anyones guess

 

[marco]

Individual, in terms of Jordan’s position though. Surely there’s no defending that? This guy has been totally against owner investment labelling us a Frankenstein club. Now it’s Utd he wants a rule changed and that’s ok?

take no notice its a phone up show all designed to make people phone in and increase revenue, for instance you will get one guy saying we should be relegated and another saying we shouldnt it creates conversation,all there interested is increasing revenue

 

[BufordUSABlue]

"Fwankenstein"

Just **** will suffice

 

[sir baconface]

If we can demonstrate that other clubs have been “creative accounting” then all the better tbh .

I tried a similar argument when I got caught speeding.

 

[Gray]

I think alot would leave tbh

Yes they would but a fresh start with some young blood, many from the academy.

Visits to places like Barrow, Grimsby, Harrogate, Hartlepool, Plymouth, Ipswich, Portsmouth, Exeter, Bristol, Oxford, Fleetwood, Morecambe, Cambridge etc with thousands of travelling fans - just like the good old days.

City fans are made of very strong stuff.

 

[paska]

No, it's like countries voting to legalise weed after decades of increasing criminalisation.

The laws exist as they are and have to be followed. That doesn't mean you can't support legalisation or overturning the current law.

Or see prohibition in the USA as an even more appropriate example. Someone saying "we tried prohibition for 13 years but it's not working", doesn't mean they have to support forgiving everyone who was convicted for bootlegging over the last decade.



This whole "the rules were stoopid so who cares if we broke them?" attitude belongs in primary school, it's no defence or excuse. Either you follow the rules you willingly signed up to or you try to change them through the allowed means.

City never tried to change the rules, which means they had to follow them. That's why these charges are so serious if we're found guilty.

Willingly signed up for, funny you should say that as in both examples that didn’t happen

You don’t willingly sign up for the laws that are imposed on you from birth.

Likewise, City didn’t willingly sign up for a cartel league, corrupt governance, FFP, et al. It was a long and rotten coup d’etat that carried away the entire pyramid through linkage.

 

[halfcenturyup]

am i right in thinking this all boils down to non cooperation? the PL wants us to give them evidence of us inflating sponsorship paying players and staff through other companies etc and we are saying that non of this excist? and basically they are saying it does through old hacked emails? or maybe i am just reading it all wrong?

Nobody knows.

 

[Blu3m00n91]

Look at all these cockroach journalist creating these stories about Haaland, Pep etc wanting to leave. The club are too fucking soft. They need to be banned from attending the Etihad and having the opportunity to ask Pep and the players the shit questions. I’m sick of it

 

[Bluemoonadam]

Yes they would but a fresh start with some young blood, many from the academy.

Visits to places like Barrow, Grimsby, Harrogate, Hartlepool, Plymouth, Ipswich, Portsmouth, Exeter, Bristol, Oxford, Fleetwood, Morecambe, Cambridge etc with thousands of travelling fans - just like the good old days.

City fans are made of very strong stuff.

I could possibly accept them sending us down aslong as they didn't take our titles off us.

 

[M18CTID]

He's against City because he thinks we broke the rules. The rules he (presumably) was having to run his club by during the same period. He's got good reason to think we broke the rules as well, the emails look damning, the PL has enough evidence to charge us.

That's why this judicial process is important to everyone.

Wrong. He's been against us ever since the takeover which pre-dated the rules. He calls us (and Chelsea) "artificial clubs" and that's fuck all to do with whether he thinks we broke the rules - it's to do with him slagging off clubs whose owners pump lots of money into football clubs. Well, certain football clubs anyway. Just watch the **** change his tune if the Qataris buy his beloved United.