PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BrianW]

The Kangaroo Court has to proceed in accordance with the rules of Natural Justice - if they don't, they are asking for their verdict to be struck down in the King's Courts.

So although they don't have to proceed exactly like a real court, they have to be careful.

Natural justice Definition | Legal Glossary | LexisNexis

Refers to the basic fundamental principles of fair treatment.

www.lexisnexis.co.uk

 

[BAB.DAB]

Mistake then ?

Or honesty!

 

[terraloon]

I think the opposite.

If the PL had significant evidence we wouldn't be here, we'd be talking about the implications of our punishment.

We're engaged in this farce precisely because they don't have the evidence.

City has consistently stated that this nonsense is nothing more than a campaign with a single purpose, to damage the reputation of the club. A campaign spearheaded by the usual suspects on the continent and closer to home in London and down the road, and nothing I've heard or read has convinced me otherwise.

Throw into the mix the PL desire to show they're capable of keeping their own house in order ahead of an independent regulator and it's a perfect win, win for our rivals. They manage to find something to hang us with and it's doubles all round, they don't and it doesn't matter, we're still dodgy and everyone knows it.

Just as there was no redemption for City after CAS, there'll be no redemption after this, regardless of the outcome.

This is politics, the process is the punishment, and the verdict is already in from the one court that matters, the one court they control absolutely, the court of public opinion.

It is highly unlikely that City would have received sight of the evidence upon which the PL are relying at the time City made their statement.The charge sheet has provision for certain documents to be attached but it’s not mandatory
I would find it unimaginable that City would admit the charges be they guilty or not so the process then takes its course so Cities statement is measured and from my perspective almost certainly would had been drafted in advance
I know it fits a narrative but I just can’t see why the PL would have lodged frivolous charges from their perspective and based on history when then lodge charges they on balance end up proven

 

[journolud]

They are also the first club to have a cheese room and if that doesn't make you massive, I don't know what does. Other than floodlights, obviously.

When they got dumped out of the FA Cup the other week, the commentary made it sound like their should be a minute's silence, as they're so synonymous with it. He obviously hadn't realised the year doesn't end in a 1...

They have never won the FA Cup in a year beginning with 2. Only another 77 to go before they can dream again

 

[terraloon]

The Kangaroo Court has to proceed in accordance with the rules of Natural Justice - if they don't, they are asking for their verdict to be struck down in the King's Courts.

So although they don't have to proceed exactly like a real court, they have to be careful.

Natural justice Definition | Legal Glossary | LexisNexis

Refers to the basic fundamental principles of fair treatment.

www.lexisnexis.co.uk

Ok not in respect of the hearing itself but the question of PL impartiality in relation to arbitration has already established

 

[Rory Bluelow]

I think the opposite.

If the PL had significant evidence we wouldn't be here, we'd be talking about the implications of our punishment.

We're engaged in this farce precisely because they don't have the evidence.

City has consistently stated that this nonsense is nothing more than a campaign with a single purpose, to damage the reputation of the club. A campaign spearheaded by the usual suspects on the continent and closer to home in London and down the road, and nothing I've heard or read has convinced me otherwise.

Throw into the mix the PL desire to show they're capable of keeping their own house in order ahead of an independent regulator and it's a perfect win, win for our rivals. They manage to find something to hang us with and it's doubles all round, they don't and it doesn't matter, we're still dodgy and everyone knows it.

Just as there was no redemption for City after CAS, there'll be no redemption after this, regardless of the outcome.

This is politics, the process is the punishment, and the verdict is already in from the one court that matters, the one court they control absolutely, the court of public opinion.

Excellent post IMO. It’s easy to lose the big picture and get dazzled by all the detail that must be played out in front of the PL’s panel. This is just an another in a long sequence of hit jobs on City of increasing severity - closely correlating with our progress since the takeover in 2008. It’s driven by commercial and sporting “rivalry” of a handful of clubs who control the game including its administration, and surrounding media. It’s a high stakes game but there are a few signs it’s starting to unravel. I can believe the story about a video call led by Levy pressuring Masters to go with the “charges” ready or not. If that truly happened, City will have known which may explain Pep’s extraordinary presser where he called out Levy.
Someone said much earlier in this thread that City need to engage a top PR agency (to at least get some balance in the narrative). An absolute must. The failure to counter or mitigate the constant drip of negative PR has been the only blot on the superb performance under HHSM ownership.
(oh..and losing to fucking Chelsea in the UCL final :))

 

[117 M34]

They are also the first club to have a cheese room and if that doesn't make you massive, I don't know what does. Other than floodlights, obviously.

When they got dumped out of the FA Cup the other week, the commentary made it sound like their should be a minute's silence, as they're so synonymous with it. He obviously hadn't realised the year doesn't end in a 1...

It's also got to start with a 1

 

[halfcenturyup]

But there are other things in my life right now that irritate the fuck out of me a lot more and I'll have to live with it as I do them, I suppose!

Yes, I am sorry. i will try to shut up and leave you alone :)

 

[halfcenturyup]

No but read the last paragraph of petsuras last post which is the point I am making

“I fully accept that the Commission will hear the evidence and decide on the limitation point. If that goes against City with respect to any matter, the club's case almost certainly fails as far as that issue is concerned. The converse is also true. I present it in that way because that's probably how the Commission will approach it, so it makes sense for me to do the same.”

In other words the commission will hear the evidence and not bar based on time

If the evidence is there to prove the PLs case then it can’t be time barred if it isn’t then time barring is not relevant

In UEFA statues they specifically bar matters based on time

Tbf to @Chris in London, he is well aware of that and has explained why and how in detail, as if to an idiot, many times. I know, because I was that idiot :)

 

[Maly]

Rory.

My points are on process and what we know .

Yes I have a view re some ( not all the charges ) and it’s the two that I keep mentioning namely Mancini’s wages and The Image Rights issue . Most if not all those that post on here don’t see it the same way and just I being a fan from a rival club as you pint would expect it I would expect the polar opposite take from City fans
petrusha

That IMO applies even if the lawyers on here, including me, have overstated and overestimated the effect of the need for cogency in terms of the standard of proof given the nature of the charges. (I don't think we have.)

Thats an interesting point and something that I too have thought about.

It’s worth remembering that this isn’t a court of law although it’s run in accordance with English law.


Does that mean for instance that the rules of evidence apply in the Courts apply ? I don’t think they do.

I have attended a couple of cases before a Football tribunal of course they were no where near as complex as the city case and my club and solicitors thought the case was cast iron yet we lost them both.

You’re a lawyer & yet the football tribunal cases you attended, ‘your club’ didn’t use you as the solicitor?

Why didn’t you just use yourself?

Or are you still making things up to make yourself sound credible?

 

[terraloon]

Excellent post IMO. It’s easy to lose the big picture and get dazzled by all the detail that must be played out in front of the PL’s panel. This is just an another in a long sequence of hit jobs on City of increasing severity - closely correlating with our progress since the takeover in 2008. It’s driven by commercial and sporting “rivalry” of a handful of clubs who control the game including its administration, and surrounding media. It’s a high stakes game but there are a few signs it’s starting to unravel. I can believe the story about a video call led by Levy pressuring Masters to go with the “charges” ready or not. If that truly happened, City will have known which may explain Pep’s extraordinary presser where he called out Levy.
Someone said much earlier in this thread that City need to engage a top PR agency (to at least get some balance in the narrative). An absolute must. The failure to counter or mitigate the constant drip of negative PR has been the only blot on the superb performance under HHSM ownership.
(oh..and losing to fucking Chelsea in the UCL final :))

I understand why and how a City fan could and would feel like that.

If you look at most teams forum you will see that they think the media “ has it in for them”Look no further that Untold Arsenal referenced by MC18 a few days ago.

I am not naive enough to believe that clubs don’t get in the ears of the PLs CEO but the story about the charges is for me a little too far fetched in terms of how it happened and what was said during that meeting and the subsequent actions.

These charges revolve around some very complicated matters their Is a view that in the UEFA case the set themselves deadlines that ultimately worked against UEFAs ability to complete their own investigations.

 

[terraloon]

You’re a lawyer & yet the football tribunal cases you attended, ‘your club’ didn’t use you as the solicitor?

Why didn’t you just use yourself?

Or are you still making things up to make yourself sound credible?

Where have I ever said I am a lawyer ?

I said I was involved in football administration and it was my role as secreatry of the club I atended

 

[cheekybids]

I understand why and how a City fan could and would feel like that.

If you look at most teams forum you will see that they think the media “ has it in for them”Look no further that Untold Arsenal referenced by MC18 a few days ago.

I am not naive enough to believe that clubs don’t get in the ears of the PLs CEO but the story about the charges is for me a little too far fetched in terms of how it happened and what was said during that meeting and the subsequent actions.

These charges revolve around some very complicated matters their Is a view that in the UEFA case the set themselves deadlines that ultimately worked against UEFAs ability to complete their own investigations.

You don’t think the media have it in for City?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Hardly concealing it if we have included it/paid it through one of our City accounts though?

That's another of the things I am having trouble reconciling. If the issue was fraudulently hiding Mancini's second contract from the PL (not from the signed, audited annual accounts because it isn't material enough to affect the true and fair view given by the signed, audited annual accounts), then why on God's green earth would the payments be made from MCFC bank accounts? I suppose Mansour has enough cash of his own if he wants to pay Mancini out of the books of ADUG.

Also, if the AJ payments were actually made through MCFC bank accounts, they were presumably recorded as costs by MCFC (where else could they have been?). So the annual accounts presumably included the full cost of Mancini's remuneration from both contracts. Pretty strange behaviour for someone trying to hide something. (I suppose the payments could have been set up as a receivable from ADUG and been reimbursed, but it is rather strange behaviour to have the payments coming in and out three times if you are trying to hide them).

To summarise, if the motive wasn't fraudulently hiding disclosure of the second contract (and if it was, management did a piss-poor job), it is time barred.

I am not sure there is going to be anything in this one, either.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I understand why and how a City fan could and would feel like that.

If you look at most teams forum you will see that they think the media “ has it in for them”Look no further that Untold Arsenal referenced by MC18 a few days ago.

I am not naive enough to believe that clubs don’t get in the ears of the PLs CEO but the story about the charges is for me a little too far fetched in terms of how it happened and what was said during that meeting and the subsequent actions.

These charges revolve around some very complicated matters their Is a view that in the UEFA case the set themselves deadlines that ultimately worked against UEFAs ability to complete their own investigations.

Imho, you are straying into territory you, as a fan of a rival club, should steer well clear of. By all means, share with us your experience with investigations and your views on these investigations, but you aren't doing yourself any favours when you wade into areas like press and red shirt agendas.

If I may be so bold, you should try to stick to the technical details ....

 

[Centurions]

They have never won the FA Cup in a year beginning with 2. Only another 77 to go before they can dream again

Plus the other 900 years?

 

[terraloon]

You don’t think the media have it in for City?

Not particularly no although it’s easy for many to take that view

It seems to me that the press in particular have so little news to report they latch onto a snippet and join dots but not in the right order.

I could point out many such instances re my club one of the very best examples revolved around FIFAs case which led to our one year transfer ban.The press used all sorts of phrases one of which was child trafficking yet had the youngsters been born in the EU then no charges would ever have been laid

 

[terraloon]

Imho, you are straying into territory you, as a fan of a rival club, should steer well clear of. By all means, share with us your experience with investigations and your views on these investigations, but you aren't doing yourself any favours when you wade into areas like press and red shirt agendas.

If I may be so bold, you should try to stick to the technical details ....

That’s what I have tried to do but I don’t think it’s out of order to answer a question when I asked it

 

[Centurions]

I think the opposite.

If the PL had significant evidence we wouldn't be here, we'd be talking about the implications of our punishment.

We're engaged in this farce precisely because they don't have the evidence.

City has consistently stated that this nonsense is nothing more than a campaign with a single purpose, to damage the reputation of the club. A campaign spearheaded by the usual suspects on the continent and closer to home in London and down the road, and nothing I've heard or read has convinced me otherwise.

Throw into the mix the PL desire to show they're capable of keeping their own house in order ahead of an independent regulator and it's a perfect win, win for our rivals. They manage to find something to hang us with and it's doubles all round, they don't and it doesn't matter, we're still dodgy and everyone knows it.

Just as there was no redemption for City after CAS, there'll be no redemption after this, regardless of the outcome.

This is politics, the process is the punishment, and the verdict is already in from the one court that matters, the one court they control absolutely, the court of public opinion.

It certainly gives a measure of plausibility to the story that @Luca1894 told earlier.

 

[halfcenturyup]

That’s what I have tried to do but I don’t think it’s out of order to answer a question when I asked it

:) Maybe. Then prepare for the onslaught.