PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Corky]

I get that,but when the PL was formed,with it's all singing and dancing cheer girls,which we had on our very first game,and sky were claiming the start of a new era,we,or shall I say the club,knew this was a cash making cow to be part of.

We all sort of knew back then,that we were pretty shit,compared to the "elitist" clubs,but as naive as it sounds it was because they had bigger grounds,and crowds,therefore getting more money in.

Sky had sort of promised,that they would be helping all clubs coffers with the TV rights money,and to be part of it in 1992 was music to chairmens ears.

Now as we became a yo-yo club,we evidently missed out on that sort of income every season,and through bad boardroom politics of course.

As City fans we knew that trying to get into the top 6 was an achievement in itself,as we'd never catch the top clubs.

Fast forward to 2008 when things started to change,and through one thing or another we find ourselves,still at the top of the pyramid,but I'm very concerned at what has been going on behind the scenes,and I won't rest easy until liccle Citeh's name is cleared.

We beat the cartel,well on the pitch we have anyway

The PL was not driven by Sky. it was greedy chairman to the highest bidder. We finished above MU and Liverpool in the 2 seasons before it started, and Arsenal and Chelsea were below us in mid-table in the first season. It was a pretty level playing field to start off with. We just went backwards when we needed to push on.

 

[Coatigan]

ASWell it took them 4 years to get to this, without our piles of evidence . So it wouldn't surprise me if we are talking at leat a couple of years.Unless of course they take one look at our evidence and say the charges are dismissed and fine us for non cooperation and wasting their time.

I'm not sure it is that comparable, and agree with domalino on this one. Thought the same myself earlier.

It taking a really long time as it goes through various courts, I can get. It would be expected, civil servants time and availability, general caseloads and commitments to things already in motion, waiting for its turn, on top of then the time it takes to review it and rule on the matter.

A panel, assembled purely for this purpose with no other commitments should really only take as long as it takes to review the information and come to a conclusion.

You are right in that the PL took 4 years, but in some ways you'd think there would have been a wait while the uefa investigation and then the cas process took place too. And even if not, if they were actively working on it for 4 years, doesnt mean it takes the same time to review it.

The cas review of Uefa's decision on took months. Uefa's regulatorybbody that dishes out punishment took months, once the charges were put forward. The one that took time was the investigation to come to the charges. I don't see why the regulatory panel decision part of this should take as long as many think.

 

[paska]

I get that,but when the PL was formed,with it's all singing and dancing cheer girls,which we had on our very first game,and sky were claiming the start of a new era,we,or shall I say the club,knew this was a cash making cow to be part of.

We all sort of knew back then,that we were pretty shit,compared to the "elitist" clubs,but as naive as it sounds it was because they had bigger grounds,and crowds,therefore getting more money in.

Sky had sort of promised,that they would be helping all clubs coffers with the TV rights money,and to be part of it in 1992 was music to chairmens ears.

Now as we became a yo-yo club,we evidently missed out on that sort of income every season,and through bad boardroom politics of course.

As City fans we knew that trying to get into the top 6 was an achievement in itself,as we'd never catch the top clubs.

Fast forward to 2008 when things started to change,and through one thing or another we find ourselves,still at the top of the pyramid,but I'm very concerned at what has been going on behind the scenes,and I won't rest easy until liccle Citeh's name is cleared.

We beat the cartel,well on the pitch we have anyway

That’s my point though, it’s not the same thing that was being sold in 1992. Even if we were a bit willing for that change, all the subsequent ones are a different story.

Maybe you call it making a deal with the devil, and I suppose we all did, but we we’re duped and we’ve been co-erced and dragged into the current set-up just as much as Everton, Aston Villa, West Ham, or yes Newcastle have for that matter.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

They aren't known in detail though. Matt Lawton is one of the better commentators on financial stuff but he's just guessing, as we all are.

There is stuff about sponsorship in those charges but they're a subset of the overall group of charges around our accounts. It looks to me like the PL are going back to the period that was time-barred, as well as the period that wasn't. But I also think it involves the image rights payment issue, when these were paid by Fordham, rather than the club directly.

But that's speculation; we don't know the detail.

In essence though, if charge 1 is proven everything else follows from that and, if it isn’t, the same is true? The only way we can be found guilty of point 1 is if some high ranking current or past board member fronts up and says it’s all fraudulent and a pack of lies and here are the details to prove it. Assuming the PL don’t plan to ’spring’ that witness, presumably City would know about it and would have pleaded guilty early on, or will if the ‘whistleblower‘ is produced?
Without that, the required standard of proof against the board, the auditors, the accountants and a whole other raft of people, a conspiracy in other words, that fraudulent accounts have been filed for at least 9 consecutive years is huge.
Much bigger than UEFA required and they failed to provide it, in fact CAS described it as “barely credible“.
Also, in essence, the 3 man panel are CAS and will undoubtedly have the same requirements for proof as they did.
If all that is true, the only way we can be found guilty is, in fact, if we’re 100% guilty. I’ll take that…..

 

[Manncity]

The biggest mistake our owners/board made was following our expenditure from 2008-10, we had to balance the books within a 1 year period.This was impossible,who knows what actions the owners took. All done for the greater good of the club, to invest in players and facilities.
we should of challenged the elite cartel of clubs then instead we chose not too, and we played softball with them. Detrimental to ourselves these red clubs had their own agenda, to stop us at all costs. We are guilty of increasing transfer fees and players wages, we we’re playing catch up against clubs that were used to getting their own way, breaking transfer records every year, cherry picking the best young players from lesser clubs.
Whatever happens now will last at least 2-4 years, we may well plead guilty to some of the lesser offences and get fines, but we will plead not guilty to the most serious charges.
The whole process should be challenged back to the days of its inception if possible.
We won’t be losing titles or cups, definitely fines or point reductions I’m sure. However if they did relegate us to a lower division, then I hope it’s division 2, why?? Because that would be a greater story to follow and our/my loyalty will never change to a club that has been part of my life for 59 years. CTID.

 

[Dribble]

Has this been posted yet?

Thought it was really good summary

Interesting (strokes chin).... VERY interesting!

 

[Saddleworth2]

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

It’s a high risk strategy for them as if they are wrong do they not lay themselves open to legal action for the material damage to our business? Let’s face it if we were a fste company our stock would have taken a massive pounding through these allegations.

 

[Keeper!]

Its either them or us who has made a HUGE error in judgement. You're acting like the club doesn't have a world to lose. So you're telling me we built a 4 billion pound glass house just waiting to be smashed at the drop of a hat. Well its nowhere near that simple. You can think people are underestimating the Prem's position and I can tell you you're underestimating ours. We shall see.

Even the very best make mistakes.

 

[daveoswald]

Arrogance?

Never understood why we and others never fought FFP, if we had none of this would havWin or lose this

Oh come on ffs. You have got to be kidding?

I’d be like if a robber commits a crime and gets arrested for it without much evidence but then the people who grassed him up fancied doing a robbery too, so those in power, who were the grasses mates, quickly changed the law to make it legal in order to suit the grasses.

Perfectly fair because the robber broke the law but the latter didn’t right? Absolutely reasonable behaviour. You can’t pick and choose when laws stand or exist in order to suit an agenda.

Simon Jordan was mega critical of Qatar, when he was out there for the World cup he was rubbing shoulders with the Sheikhs, on his return he appears to have done a road to Damascus. Perhaps there might be something in it for him.

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

Well it took them 4 years to get to this, without our piles of evidence . So it wouldn't surprise me if we are talking at leat a couple of years.Unless of course they take one look at our evidence and say the charges are dismissed and fine us for non cooperation and wasting their time.

Let’s be honest, they’ve been sat on this for at least 3 1/2 years of that, most of the so called evidence has been there for them to look at, with only non-compliance a feature since. This is a time sensitive manoeuvre brought about by the stories breaking daily such as the White paper & ESL, with more to come. They could of charged us at any stage in the last four years, as there hasn’t been any further alleged breaches, and we’ve maintained the stance of not dropping our drawers for them to have a root around. They’ve waited till now & it’s becoming clearer every day why