PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Chopper2115 said:
Surely an apology isn’t enough for us and we could sue for defamation or are we doing that already?
Click to expand...

There won't be an apology if the Premier League loses. The CPS doesn't apologise to everyone found not guilty at trial.

As long as the Premier League investigation had even the most surface level good faith reasoning for charging the club (ie they didn't knowingly bring false charges) then it's pretty hard to imagine they've done anything wrong.

The best chance for a "fuck you!" moment for City would be if the 3 man panel publishes a judgement like the CAS one which has some good lines for City to quote about the case being weak or the panel being relatively dismissive of the Premier League's case.
 
Last edited:
PhdWave said:
Those are apparently very big accusations (according to Stefan). They said that we falsified our accounts for 9 years, and also misled auditors for nine years. The accusation means that all our board directors had a part in falsifying the accounts (implication) and hence are dishonest. Its going to need tremendous proof to prove that claim.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. All the PL have to show is that our accounts weren't what we said they were (still a high burden) but the rest of the stuff - motive, mens rea, etc - isn't relevant (for them). It may be relevant in other proceedings
 
ancoats said:
I've sort of just given up, WE ARE GUILTY no matter the outcome, Manchester city can not win,
we are public enemy number one, with the red scum media leading the witch hunt, the damage was done a long time, not by the money, But by our own media team being so weak, letting the media run riot and totally unchallenged from day one, it should have been an iron fist and legal action taken,

just go and look at liverpool and Klopp in the after match interview at the weekend ? we told you am not taking any Questions from you, the club have made it very clear to you,


NOW we have a Kangaroo court in the media and with the public, every time something comes up, Guilty ? end of story, whatever the statement it's Manchester city cheating again and again,
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t worry about public opinion etc, youngsters these days have far more scope for searching the truth (even the foc’s have a go) and having a mind of their own, social media has been around a long time now & people are more accustomed to looking beneath the surface, these things have a tendency to go full circle…..the future is positive and our support is growing at a massive rate, one day we’ll be sat at the top of the tree in terms of support overseas and even within the media. Getting back to youngsters having a mind of their own, I was at an academy game (not City) watching my nephew whose 7, his mate was from Liverpool and has been making his mum take him to City games, the threat to the cartel clubs has reached their doorsteps and they hate it
 
skillman said:
Haha. Jamie Jackson you sly, rag bastard.

In Seluk, he's gone to the first person you would think of that would stick the knife in City, and Pep's back, and it's seemingly completely backfired on him.

What a prick.
Click to expand...

Alleged payments to Seluk are responsible for about a third of the charges so to be honest he's the perfect person to speak to and about as relevant as it gets.
 
rowarta said:
I expect every gutter sports journalist will be trying to dig up dirt from players who were around 2009-2017 who have departed the club.
Click to expand...

Yaya and Seluk are the main people I can think of that have been public with their dislike of us in the past so if Seluk in particular has denied any wrongdoing then it's a good start.

Also, who would want to put their name to taking dodgy payments anyway?
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I may be in a minority but I also thought City's response was poor. The sarcastic tone was stupid given the situation and will not do us any favours in the long-term. We now have to present our case to an independent panel and the tone we adopt will influence the outcome. A flippant tone is a very bad idea. I would have liked a strong statement which just made it clear that we rejected the allegations and had very strong evidence to disprove them.
Click to expand...
Did they not do that? They refuted it and stated they welcome an independent review that’ll show all the evidence to clear us. What more do they need to say? It’s simple and to the point, nothing more needs to be said.
 
I used to speak to a Football Agent, Peter Harrison (he bought a house off my boss in Whitegates, County Durham which housed my gaffers office and still got messages on the business landline), he was Nedum Onhua's agent, once told me he was thinking of selling Nedum to the Dippers as he needed a new kitchen.

Anyway, he was involved in the Ali Dia Southampton deal, (Google it) but also infamously filmed by Panorama for their "Football's dirty secrets" programme.

Have a look at this 9 minutes video, it's not the be all and end all but gives you an insight into how clubs operate outside the rules and it's impossible we are the only Club that should be investigated.

 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I may be in a minority but I also thought City's response was poor. The sarcastic tone was stupid given the situation and will not do us any favours in the long-term. We now have to present our case to an independent panel and the tone we adopt will influence the outcome. A flippant tone is a very bad idea. I would have liked a strong statement which just made it clear that we rejected the allegations and had very strong evidence to disprove them.
Click to expand...

No, the facts and arguments will influence the outcome, not the statement released by the club yesterday. That will be long forgotten when the hearing starts in-front of a (unbiased) ‘PL picked commission’.
 
Ric said:
There was this tbf.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about the political angle this morning. Not only are City the only top six club that supports the introduction of an independent regulator but the model of ownership we have is a perfect blueprint, in terms of community investment and sound financial support, to use as a yardstick to measure up any future potential owners and their plans.

There is no way a truly independent regulator could look at the Glazer/US approach and conclude it is better for the club and/or football in general than ours. I think that is the battleground here and explains the apparent haste in yesterdays announcement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top