PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Jesus H Gabz said:
You don’t think us being charged changes things for prospective new owners of either the rags or dippers ? It changes everything, their investment levels, potential earnings, the prospect of a super league, they want us out of the picture and will then move on to Newcastle
Click to expand...
I agree with you to an extent. I think there could be an argument made that FSG and Glaziers can’t sell their respective clubs because City has made club ownership unprofitable because you need to pump in hundreds of millions of pounds …….and are not guaranteed trophies or CL football….the yanks thought they were buying money printers but that’s all changed because of lickle city.

So the obvious answer is to peg city back. Give them a couple of 20 point deductions, or a player embargo and massive fine that means they can’t qualify for CL for at least a couple of seasons…..give newbies a chance, damage city’s reputation beyond repair, etc, etc.
 
Last edited:
Ric said:
Not sure if I’m missing something, but why would that be relevant to this?
Click to expand...

You’re right, it isn’t.

But the more Arab club owners, especially of the Red Shirt clubs, the better it is for us.

I appreciate it’s not the perfect mix, the UAE, Saudi and Qatari, but they would rather work with each other than work with the Jewish owned (red shirt) clubs, who lets be honest, have been working together trying destroy City from the day they got together. Only Spurs are missing from that picture, but they signed the Arsenal headed letter to the PL.

1675809904707.jpeg

1675810041744.jpeg
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
As I said, the Mancini stuff is small beer so not worried about that in the slightest. The other accounting stuff may well hinge on how we dealt with image rights payments and whether that was OK. We sold those image rights to Fordham for around £25m back in 2013. We needed that money to (as we thought) avoid FFP sanctions but that was rendered redundant by UEFA moving the goalposts.

But I'm pretty sure UEFA would have known about this at the time they were investigating, as it was part of the Der Spiegel stories that triggered their investigation and charges. You have to wonder why they didn't go after us on that score as it potentially inflated our profits, by reducing our wage costs. Possibly they were advised it wasn't illegal or thr sums involved wouldn't have made a difference to our FFP results. It was also happening up to 2018, so well within any limitation period, should one be imposed by the courts or independent commission.

Assuming we had good legal and accounting advice before doing that, and our auditors were aware of it and weren't unhappy, then there's a decent chance that we'll be OK. If we weren't on firm ground with that, if we deceived the auditors and UEFA, then we've got problems.
Click to expand...
Wasn't Fordham owned by City? So their argument is we were paying players through Fordham but keeping it off the books. Is that correct?
 
I'm still fighting on social media channels.

This one seemed to get some pretty good traction! :

The first rule of The Condescending Club is kind of complex, and I don't think you people on here lapping up City would understand even if I explained it to you..


After a tough start, I'm rather enjoying it now."Spartans!"
 
jrb said:
You’re right, it isn’t.

But the more Arab club owners, especially of the Red Shirt clubs, the better it is for us.

I appreciate it’s not the perfect mix, the UAE, Saudi and Qatari, but they would rather work with each other than work with the Jewish owned (red shirt) clubs, who lets be honest, have been working together trying destroy City from the day they got together. Only Spurs are missing from that picture, but they signed the Arsenal headed letter to the PL.

View attachment 68439

View attachment 68441
Click to expand...
Qatari relations with Saudi and the UAE/Abu Dhabi are at an all time low so a Qatari owned MUFC would still want us in the mud I assure you. Our only ally is Newcastle in this league.
 
Ajay said:
Just a point.... do you think that we sat around waiting for the PL to charge us then make a few calls to appoint a KC, let alone one of the best... these guys are not sat in their office wondering if they have work for the next few years, they are booked solid!

Our legal team were booked a long time ago and put on retainer ready to go into battle when needed!
Click to expand...
domalino said:
It’s an embarrassing mistake but not sure it’s as bad as you’re making out.

Some intern has gotten the years that the rule book changed wrong. In 2012 the laws moved around so the old rule C became rule E

E11 in 2011/12 is entering the Fa cup and in 2012/13 onwards its submitting accounts and they’ve mislabelled it.

The 12/13 book even has a little column telling you what the old rule was - I bet they never realised how important that would be!

Not sure it will get us off, but I do think it will impact how the more diligent journalists like Kieran Maguire view the competency of the PL legal team.
Click to expand...

Could it be deliberate? We do get off but with a technicality & forever tarnished.

Personally I think like yourself they have a right to correct any errors & will. I’d imagine the headlines will be additional charges added.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.