PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[JewelZee]

Not sure I want that.

Will get pelters for this but I want the club to accept wrongdoing, make some changes to the hierarchy and commit to running the club honestly from here on out. Take the punishment on the chin so long as it's not stripping us of past titles. We can't keep doing this every few years.

End of the day, I'd rather a club I can feel proud to support.

WTF are you saying?

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

If I remember correctly, Khaldoon when discussing the uefa case made it clear that this was not only an attack on city but an attack on the premier league. He warned they wanted to stop the success due to the other European leagues suffering. It might have been Tebas remarks he was referring to at the time.

Now roll onto 2023 and the greedy bastards in red are fulfilling that prophecy. They are so consumed with hate and jealousy towards stopping city at all costs. Even going so far as to be the main driving force behind the super league. This charade will damage the credibility of the league either way.Throw in the independent regulation and the job is nearly done. The reds cunts win.

Just like 92 the rags/dips wanted it all and will stop at nothing to achieve this aim including destroying MCFC. If we do prevail and once again claim victory It will be hallow. The league is rotten and in an ideal world I would not want City to be apart of it.

It’s not only City’s job to keep the league honest. The rest of the sheep would need to wake up before it too late. The club is not perfect but it is also not the corrupt club the media want everyone to believe. The later obviously has a vested interest in keeping this narrative going. Print media is going to the wall. I bet they have made a few quid this week.

I don't expect the press to defend City but I expect them to defend the League, I think khaldoon said.

 

[Iassel]

Much less confident now.

The PL is essentially judge, jury and executioner. Not sure how we get an impartial hearing when the PL get to mark their own homework and no court of the land can oversee it.

I mean on paper you could see it that way, but the arbitration panel are unlikely to end up being manned by the intern, the coffee boy and a paralegal knocking about….

These will be decorated people with significant reputations and who are not going to make a ruling based upon what the PL want.

Of course that doesn’t mean a win is any more or less likely, simply it’s not likely to be the kangaroo court some understandably fear.

 

[Maly]

Save to the extent that the Panel members may have their own biases, I think you should assume quality arbitrators are objective and will deal with it fairly. But even in the Courts, litigation risk is always high. Few cases have merits confidently over 70%

Having just read Martin Samuels article in the Times, could we go after the Prem’s FFP rules in court, or is that complete pie in the sky?

 

[jgmcfc]

So the earlier Tweet from Martin Lipton referencing High and Supreme Court is nonsense?

In part, yes. The PL self-regulates and can impose whatever decision it sees fit within the current rules. The Commission will reach a conclusion and either party then has the ability to appeal, where an Appeal Board would hear the appeal (the members, similarly to the Commission are selected by the Chair). Practically the definition of marking your own homework (twice!).

Judicial review is not available, so City could not challenge the procedural aspects of the case by the PL, as the PL is private body so not subject to judicial review (R v Jockey Club 1992).

City could try and commence court proceedings if they view the PL to have breached their contract with City during the course of the investigation and/or subsequent hearing.

The High Court/Court of Appeal/Supreme Court wouldn’t have the power to overturn the decision(s) made by the PL per se, but their ruling could seriously undermine the legitimacy of the PL ruling and be incredibly embarrassing.

 

[Metalartin]

This is starting to stink if there is truly is no route to court. UEFA told everyone they were independent, that they had proof. It was found they did not. CAS's name got dragged through the dirt, rather than UEFA who misled everyone. Lies were told that UEFA proved to CAS things they did not, that City got off on "technicalities" on charges that weren't even explored at CAS.

The PL got to spend years building a case with their legal team. City's legal team has 2 weeks to respond. They appoint who they like as the chair and City have to accept it. All this talk of "City wont be allowed to drag this out". Smacks of: Don't defend yourself, don't challenge the "totally impartial" PL, accept it even if you know it's wrong.

Going back to a second committee appointed by them, is supposed to make City fans feel any more confident of a fair hearing why? If the first one is bad enough to justify redoing it, then what good is letting the same body orchestrate it again? Different people, same script?

There has to be a route one way or another, the PL aren't the law. No matter how many rules they put in their rulebook.

 

[slbsn]

Having just read Martin Samuels article in the Times, could we go after the Prem’s FFP rules in court, or is that complete pie in the sky?

Pie in the sky. The core of the charges aren't even FFP charges.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Not according to the rules and agreements we have signed as a member and shareholder of the PL

Sounds like posturing but could be true. I can't see how but perhaps they can find a way. I doubt it though, but maybe thats just my negativity (;-))

I should add, IF we end up in the Supreme Court my original tweet about relegation will be the least of our problems. Something would have to have gone VERY BADLY WRONG to end up there. It won't happen but just to give context.

Might be worth taking a look at the Kieran Fallon case from 2006 and the comments made on the supervisory jurisdiction of the courts in sports regulatory decisions.

Fallon was of course represented by……….

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

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?

Pretty much yes. But image rights are deemed to be personal to players and separate to their wages/bonuses. HMRC have a general rule hat about 10% of their total remuneration to be paid in this way, to their own personal companies rather than on a PAYE basis.

As an example, let's say someone is a photographer and an employee of a company that does commercial & wedding photography. He buys the right to do all the wedding photography and pays his employer a sum of money for that right. The money he earns in that way still goes to his employer initially, but they pay it to him gross, which he than has to account for and pay any tax on. Whereas his wages for the employer's main commercial photography business is paid to him as normal salary, with tax & NI deducted at source.

City also moved a number of employees into two subsidiary companies (City Football Services and City Football Marketing). They were paid through these companies but they were loss-making, needing constant injections of cash. That was seen by some as an attempt to move costs off the books but those businesses cross-charged the various CFG clubs for their services, on a pro-rata basis. Obviously most of the charge fell to City but it went through our books, as Other Operating Expenses though, instead of Wages. Also UEFA included those companies in wht it called the 'Reporting Perimeter'. That meant we had to include their results in our FFP submission, with any double-charging cancelled out.

 

[JewelZee]

I don't agree with that at all. And there is no High Court route. The only appeal is another PL Panel. So lets hope I am right!

So you're saying we're cooked, because trust me we're not going to get anywhere with the PL or any PL appeal panel. Are you saying that City has no recourse available to them in the courts? In that case wtf are we even talking about? I tend to believe that is not accurate.