PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[M18CTID]

I’ve worked on Court of Appeal and Supreme Court decisions. You get the decision c.24 hrs before promulgation to review for factual accuracy. You are clearly warned you are in contempt of court if you leak it or talk about it’s content before judgement is handed down

I'll bow to your superior knowledge on that but there was a lot of talk at the time on here that there were clues that we'd been given more advance notice of the decision than 24 hours.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Possibly touted to TV & they’ve all said “not a fucking chance.”

That Youtube programme would never have been sanctioned because it would breach all Offcom guidelines. The proven false comments by Tebas alone were libellous. It was one sided and unbalanced. Even the use of dark images with people in traditional Arab dress (complete with deep music) had racist overtones. There was not a single comment in defence of City. It was a combination of lies and innuendo..like a Putin propaganda video. I actually think it has strengthened City's case with the PL. The reason it was made by a firm based in the British Virgin Islands was to make it difficult for anyone to sue them.

 

[Stewadda#]

That Youtube programme would never have been sanctioned because it would breach all Offcom guidelines. The proven false comments by Tebas alone were libellous. It was one sided and unbalanced. Even the use of dark images with people in traditional Arab dress (complete with deep music) had racist overtones. There was not a single comment in defence of City. It was a combination of lies and innuendo..like a Putin propaganda video. I actually think it has strengthened City's case with the PL. The reason it was made by a firm based in the British Virgin Islands was to make it difficult for anyone to sue them.

I am on it with 2 mates dancing I think at the Brighton screening and they have made us look like right cunts cos we are dancing to different music to what they are playing over it. That's my excuse anyway.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

For the sake of completeness. This was UEFA's response to City's submission on Etisalat:

View attachment 85576

Not much there, to be honest. Just restating facts and interpreting them in a way to suit. Should need more than that, I imagine, to counter actual financial records and testimony from multiple club, owner and sponsor executives.

Can't seen the problem with this if Etislat reimbursed the payments. If the money went from Etislat to Adug first and then on to City I also can't see a problem as long as City were upfront about it. Do Etislat sponsor any other CFG clubs like Etihad do? If that was the case why wouldn't money go to ADUG to be apportioned later. But City admitted all this and no action was taken. Also remember the Etislat payments in 2012,2013 happened during a period when we made huge losses, failed FFP rules, and settled with UEFA for £20m. What difference did it make and are the PL trying to punish us twice for the same period? None of this is illegal and it seems the PL are just trying to twist their own rules to suit the narrative.

 

[citizen_maine]

Obviously all this is based on transfemarkt guestimates of values, but here's how much they think City have increased the value of players:

Manchester City - Market value at debut

Wie veränderten sich die Marktwerte aller Kaderspieler seit ihrem Debüt bei dem Verein Man City? Diese Statistik zeigt die Entwicklung.

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

They reckon our squad value has increased by €350m compared to their value when they made their debuts.

It also shows the utter foolishness of quoting this as a statistic, because in most cases their "value" bears very little resemblance to the prices we actually paid.

What it clearly shows, is that Nick Harris's use of the word Intelligence for his work should be an issue under the Trade Descriptions Act :)

I'd say it was done deliberately though, as the people it was aimed at will read it as 'cost', and spout that going forward. Anybody picking up on the word value won't be bothered to check what the actual cost was though, so the only figure out there that will be quoted will be the higher figure. And it will be quoted as cost.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.

Its just that we know we are right ;-)

I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I'll bow to your superior knowledge on that but there was a lot of talk at the time on here that there were clues that we'd been given more advance notice of the decision than 24 hours.

I think you get one working day. I have been involved in some big civil court cases and once got advance notice on a Friday for a decision being announced on the Monday. So we had lots of documents to check for factual errors etc. I remember it well because it ruined my weekend.

 

[hammocity]

I have offered to go on TS. Jim White has not taken up the offer yet

Can you not get Mrs PR to call in and say she’s Tits Out Jackie then grab the phone and give it to White and Jordan? I’d pay to listen to that.

 

[wolviedinho]

Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.

Its just that we know we are right ;-)

I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.

I would be taking the piss out of said supporters but I would also acknowledge and respect the decision once made. We didn’t get that with CAS and we won’t get it with the Premier case.

What has happened instead is that the media have weaponised certain fanbases against us using emotive tribalism as you suggested. Throw in social media and it’s a cesspit.

 

[citizen_maine]

Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.

Its just that we know we are right ;-)

I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.

I doubt many of us would look into the detail of the charges the way we have (tried to) with City. Whether we'd assume guilt over innocence before the case was heard, is another matter entirely :-)

 

[Centurions]

Nah, not a chance it was only 10 minutes mate. There were rumours doing the rounds in the days leading up to the announcement that it had gone our way. I seem to recall that Pep was rather smug in one particular post-match interview. Ian Cheeseman tweeted a few days before that he'd heard it was positive news. And someone who runs one of the biggest supporters club branches was gobbing off that we'd won the case to all and sundry down the pub a couple of nights before it was announced.

I read @ScottSinclair 's post as meaning the PL charges rather than the CAS decision?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I doubt many of us would look into the detail of the charges the way we have (tried to) with City. Whether we'd assume guilt over innocence before the case was heard, is another matter entirely :-)

What bothers me about LFC fans is that they, more than anyone because of Hillsborough, should know how much the media distorts and twists narratives. They are City's most vicious critics and yet these days they seem to believe everything that is written about our owner in the media, including the much-despised Sun newspaper. I am dubious about the way the media covers any story and I like to think I would not rush to judgement against another club..even our most bitter rivals.

 

[SilverFox2]

Goodness me we got terrific value for money then…..

That's what I thought a rare if accidental complement from this person.

 

[citizen_maine]

What bothers me about LFC fans is that they, more than anyone because of Hillsborough, should know how much the media distorts and twists narratives. They are City's most vicious critics and yet these days they seem to believe everything that is written about our owner in the media, including the much-despised Sun newspaper. I am dubious about the way the media covers any story and I like to think I would not rush to judgement against another club..even our most bitter rivals.

I tend to doubt most things anyone (including me) says on t'internet.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Can't seen the problem with this if Etislat reimbursed the payments. If the money went from Etislat to Adug first and then on to City I also can't see a problem as long as City were upfront about it. Do Etislat sponsor any other CFG clubs like Etihad do? If that was the case why wouldn't money go to ADUG to be apportioned later. But City admitted all this and no action was taken. Also remember the Etislat payments in 2012,2013 happened during a period when we made huge losses, failed FFP rules, and settled with UEFA for £20m. What difference did it make and are the PL trying to punish us twice for the same period? None of this is illegal and it seems the PL are just trying to twist their own rules to suit the narrative.

I suppose it's easy to create a conspiracy from partial facts. Luckily, it's much more difficult to prove.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

With regards to the "Der Spiegel" emails in relation to both Etihad and Etisalat sponsorship monies. (These 2 issues must be the backbone of the PL charges of "true financial statements" and alleged "fraud" (the only way these issues can't be time barred as the charges suggest.))

If City provide the information, documents, statements or testimony in person, under oath, to underpin their version of actual events, as given at CAS, what evidence are the PL going to offer to the contrary that will be equally as compelling or cogent?

Isn't this where UEFAs case fell apart in that all they offered was "in our opinion....." and that the emails suggested a course of action which, without context, was in breach of the rules?

How can they expect to persuade the panel of arbiters with opinion as an argument against facts?

Nobody, certainly journalist asked the question as to what on earth the UEFA investigatory board were doing in coming to a decision to find City guilty which was plainly unsupported by fact and based solely on supposition and opinion.

So now here we are facing the same charges in effect, double jeopardy, but have the PL come up with a different strategy having seen UEFA fail?

Can 2 separate serious arbitration bodies (CAS and the PL panel) really come to polar opposite different opinions based on the same evidence and an equal burden of proof. As SB points out the PL charges have more serious consequences for the breaches alleged, which means the a greater cogency should be required of any PL evidence.
Do they have such evidence?
Most blues with any knowledge of the history of this case think not. The great unwashed on Twitter, our detractors and beyond don't care. We will have to wait and see.

These allegations have tainted the club beyond repair in the eyes of many. Unretrievably so, despite any findings of the arbitration panel in our favour.

Will the club seek to right this ship? Its uncertain what if anything can be done to put this right. I do however trust the club to take whatever action necessary it deems fit, even if as a fan I'm left somewhat perplexed by seeming inaction. After all, despite all the negatives, they've not done too badly up to now!

 

[citizen_maine]

With regards to the "Der Spiegel" emails in relation to both Etihad and Etisalat sponsorship monies. (These 2 issues must be the backbone of the PL charges of "true financial statements" and alleged "fraud" (the only way these issues can't be time barred as the charges suggest.))

If City provide the information, documents, statements or testimony in person, under oath, to underpin their version of actual events, as given at CAS, what evidence are the PL going to offer to the contrary that will be equally as compelling or cogent?

Isn't this where UEFAs case fell apart in that all they offered was "in our opinion....." and that the emails suggested a course of action which, without context, was in breach of the rules?

How can they expect to persuade the panel of arbiters with opinion as an argument against facts?

Nobody, certainly journalist asked the question as to what on earth the UEFA investigatory board were doing in coming to a decision to find City guilty which was plainly unsupported by fact and based solely on supposition and opinion.

So now here we are facing the same charges in effect, double jeopardy, but have the PL come up with a different strategy having seen UEFA fail?

Can 2 separate serious arbitration bodies (CAS and the PL panel) really come to polar opposite different opinions based on the same evidence and an equal burden of proof. As SB points out the PL charges have more serious consequences for the breaches alleged, which means the a greater cogency should be required of any PL evidence.
Do they have such evidence?
Most blues with any knowledge of the history of this case think not. The great unwashed on Twitter, our detractors and beyond don't care. We will have to wait and see.

These allegations have tainted the club beyond repair in the eyes of many. Unretrievably so, despite any findings of the arbitration panel in our favour.

Will the club seek to right this ship? Its uncertain what if anything can be done to put this right. I do however trust the club to take whatever action necessary it deems fit, even if as a fan I'm left somewhat perplexed by seeming inaction. After all, despite all the negatives, they've not done too badly up to now!

I'm pretty sure the ship is heading in the right direction

 

[halfcenturyup]

I'm pretty sure the ship is heading in the right direction

Thank you Edward Smith.

(Just for balance). :)

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.

Its just that we know we are right ;-)

I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.

If I am a City fan and this was lfc I wouldnt care what the truth is. lfc are guilty and the media are hiding it.
If I am a Bournemouth fan and this was lfc I wouldnt care, all the big clubs are the same

 

[cheekybids]

What bothers me about LFC fans is that they, more than anyone because of Hillsborough, should know how much the media distorts and twists narratives. They are City's most vicious critics and yet these days they seem to believe everything that is written about our owner in the media, including the much-despised Sun newspaper. I am dubious about the way the media covers any story and I like to think I would not rush to judgement against another club..even our most bitter rivals.

I said that to a Dipper but he distorted what I said.

He was outraged.