PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Keeper!]

I can't possibly know. But I now get what you meant.

It is in our long term interests for FFP to remain

 

[ayrshire_blue]

Can anyone remember City’s reasoning for not cooperating with UEFA? From memory there were concerns about leaks to the press, in particular through a journalist called Tariq Panja at the NYT but I can’t remember why these leaks were damaging, i.e how the information was used, and the specific reasons City refused to cooperate.

I guess the reason I am asking is I am sure there will be similar reasons for not cooperating with the PL. What other reasons would City have for not sharing information?

I think because they are a shower of cunts.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

That's not whats going to happen. The scrutiny of every line in the accounts you describe has already happened over the last 4 years. You're describing an investigation, not a trial.

What will happen at the Judicial panel is the PL will present the things they've found to be breaches. ie Mancini's contract with Al-Jazira or whatever it is.

Then there will be an argument about whether that was allowed or not. When it's ruled on, it will clear about 30 charges and they'll move onto the next thing.

And there's not going to be an appeal. I think the lawyers in the press and social media have pretty much confirmed that; the only recourse for appeal is if there's procedural impropriety by the panel during the case.

CAS took 6 months. Even if we assume the PL is slow moving I can't see how it lasts 4 years.

Can’t see how it lasts 4 months to be honest. As I’ve posted, all stands or falls on charge 1. City‘s board of directors, auditors, accountants and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all would to have have been involved in a massive conspiracy for 10 years. If the accounts are legitimate, then the Mancini and Toure things disappear as does everything else.
It’s only if charge 1 is proven that it’s relevant but, to be fair, if charge 1 is proven then we will deserve the shit storm that will follow.
This was, essentially, the charge that CAS said was cobblers and unbelievable…….

 

[champo]

I think because they are a shower of cunts.

Is that legal terminology?

 

[mayo31]

This is a forum and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think a lot of people on here are not aware how serious some of these charges are and the consequences IF we are ultimately found guilty.

This , again in my opinion, has gone way past certain "historical" clubs and jealousy.

By taking this huge step, the Premier League have passed the point of no return, and if they have made a huge error in judgment they are legally screwed and it will cost them 100s of millions in damages because our "brand" has suffered a huge damaging blow, and that is fact.

How has it if we are paying ourselves sponsorship money?? ;)

 

[kaz7]

I fucking detest Carragher. Pieces of scum like him now have the mindset "well, that's it- City cheated so we won the league those years we came second."

@twosips shouldnt be talking to him, i wouldnt watch him spit let along pour bile on our club

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

I think because they are a shower of cunts.

It’s that pithy, understated, Scottish language I’d miss most if you got Independence ;-)

 

[blue44]

...and just noticed that @Ric posted it on the media thread yesterday, my day just gets worse!!

Don't worry.
Anyone fighting our corner is ok in my book

 

[lancs blue]

Can anyone remember City’s reasoning for not cooperating with UEFA? From memory there were concerns about leaks to the press, in particular through a journalist called Tariq Panja at the NYT but I can’t remember why these leaks were damaging, i.e how the information was used, and the specific reasons City refused to cooperate.

I guess the reason I am asking is I am sure there will be similar reasons for not cooperating with the PL. What other reasons would City have for not sharing information?

I thought it was to do with the potential for commercially sensitive information being leaked from recent accounts given UEFA's sieve-like confidentiality. Probably the same reasoning re the PL enquiry.

 

[mayo31]

I can only assume that the Premier League have an informant from within the club, whether it be a former backroom staff member, player etc that can back up their charges against the club.

I cannot believe they can prove any of the charges they have levied against us other than the “Noncooperation” without such a back up.
This might explain why the normal inspection of our accounts each year were passed.

If this scenario exists - then it adds more credence to their charges and City will need to discredit such evidence.

Snitches get stitches