eyalluvitt
Well-Known Member
Just like he claimed Petrovs goal at OT with the touch of the invisible man
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
BlueBlood84
Well-Known Member
If we are punished, every club who did business with us should also be scrutinized. Arsenal, for example. Were very happy to take a good chunk of money from us.
eyalluvitt
Well-Known Member
Win or Lose, the reputation of our club will be in tatters and that is probably what drives what they do.I’ve just missed a connecting flight so found myself with 8 hours to spare in Heathrow so I did some reading up on the full suite of charges. I’m a qualified accountant by trade but by no means an expert at this type of stuff. In my mind the charges all boil down to two overarching accusations:
1. Knowingly falsifying accounts for 9 years - essentially the backbone of the accusation and one of the most difficult things in civil law to prove. Hard to put into words quite how significant this claim is (volume of people involved and consequence) but the severity of the claim requires a suite of evidence that is just cannot imagine the PL being able to attain or prove. The knock on effect of this claim, if true, wouldn’t stop with football related charges but would spill well beyond that.
While not totally watertight the CAS verdict here is a very good indicator of the evidence seemingly available for this claim. While most people dismiss the CAS verdict because they think it’s mainly a time barred verdict, this isn’t actually entirely true and there are very clear outcomes within it that address this accusation, and determine that the evidence does not support such a claim.
2. Failure to comply appropriately. Not something to worry about for me. The club does have a right to provide things in a way it sees fit so it could well be that what the PL have requested is unreasonable. Equally you cannot provide things that do not exist. The independent committee will request evidence from both sides as they see fit to determine No.1 and the consequence of No.2 will be lost in the noise to prove No.1.
Most of the charges seem to sit in various guises under No.1 will a section for No.2. I wouldn’t want to go on record but based on the evidence leaked to date, the verdict of CAS, and the severity of the accusation, I feel like a strong set of lawyers will eat this particular set of allegations up. But let’s see…
Brightwell Bros.
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2014
- Messages
- 7,426
The Mancini stuff doesn't look great, but it's £3m in 2011, how bad can it be?If they are really going after us for the Mancini and image rights reasons, I would say, someone has been talking. It has to come from the inside, doesn't it?
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 6,652
If they are really going after us for the Mancini and image rights reasons, I would say, someone has been talking. It has to come from the inside, doesn't it?
The Mancini one I think came out of the emails that weren’t released until post the UEFA investigation.
Plays By Sense Of Smell
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 10,946
All to be filed in the IF/MIGHT bin.Its intresting that he says if City are found guilty clubs may decide to sue because they missed out on European competition.
Surely if that happens then the dippers should be sued by all clubs that missed out on European qualification during the ban in the 80s
Roy Munson
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 1,174
We've all done it, bud. At least you think twice. I usually just post first, ask questions later. :-)Already back tracked. See previous posts. As a rule I think twice before posting anything and making knee jerk comments . This one caught me off guard. Some times you have to hold your hands up and admit you got it wrong. I got it wrong. :-(
meltonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 May 2013
- Messages
- 6,652
The Mancini stuff doesn't look great, but it's £3m in 2011, how bad can it be?
It’s not just that, it also potentially shows we weren’t being honest about related parties and that’s the more worrying thing about it.
2 cheeks of the same arse, never let them tell you differently.View attachment 68600
People in glass houses.....
Allnightlong
Well-Known Member
i thought our accounts showed all this and the PL had seen it?It’s not just that, it also potentially shows we weren’t being honest about related parties and that’s the more worrying thing about it.