PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[wolviedinho]

Apparently we chose the judges, bribed them with oil money & then only got away with it due to being time barred ………

“So let it be written, so let it be done” -:)

 

[cheekybids]

Maybe we could bring a case for compensation against Spuds ?

I’ve wondered if we planted this story in the media & it follows the comments from Pep about asking Daniel Levy.

 

[Paladin]

If the rules they're accusing us of breaking require that we'd have had to committed fraud then they do need to prove we were fraudulent. Thank god some of you are not a part of our defense team...

If they find us guilty of certain charges, then there is a possibility that we might have acted fraudulently. But this would be a consequence of the findings. None of the charges against us mention fraud.

 

[Paladin]

What about the so-called independent panel for Everton, two of whom worked for rival PL clubs. They somehow agreed with the request by Masters for a 10 point deduction. Just naked corruption in plain view.

It isn't corruption. It's what they deemed to be a fair punishment, and they clearly explained their reasons for the punishment.

Anyone is entitled to have a different opinion on what a fair punishment should be for Everton, but it doesn't mean the punishment given was necessarily wrong, and it doesn't imply corruption.

The penalty might be reduced on appeal. But again, that doesn't imply corruption.

 

[Paladin]

But the PL keep changing the rules without any agreement with the clubs. The Everton sanction criteria was made up by Masters. This is a farce.

I agree with Burnham to an extent. He said it is wrong to draw up punishment guidelines after the event, and then apply them retrospectively. The incompetent PL tried this with Everton, hence Burnham's complaint.

The commission disregarded the PL guidelines though, and applied what they thought was the correct punishment for Everton. It just so happens to be the same punishment recommended by the PL, and that has brought on a heap of additional trouble.

The PL should have just let the commission get on with their job, without interfering.

Burnham also said the proper way to draw up punishment guidelines is to have them discussed by all members clubs and to agree a fair set of guidelines with a vote. Again, another example of the incompetence of Masters and the PL. Masters' position is fast becoming untenable.

 

[Paladin]

It's all a bit mad!

I don't really know anything of the case but Docking points from this season for "offences" from previous seasons makes no sense at all.

And Docking points from a League table makes a complete mockery of the whole season anyway.
It doesn't just punish Everton but benefits half a dozen teams at the bottom of the League scrapping to avoid relegation, but makes no difference at all to the Top half teams.

The integrity of the League is shot to pieces with this docking points nonsense.

If guilty fine, but come up with a punishment that effects the guilty team only.

Come the end of the season Everton may be in a position where they have to win games to stay up, whereas without the sanction they would be safe.
I'm sure the teams they are playing against won't be too happy if they also need the points!

Masters and the PL have completely fucked up and to me this looks like some botched attempt to try and severely sanction City and Chelsea who at this point have not been found guilty!

The commission in the Everton case said that the failures by Everton are so serious that a sporting sanction must be made. Everton argued that a financial sanction should apply and would be fairer.

The commission said that if they applied only a fine, the owners would dip into their pockets, pay off the fine, and Everton would be in no worse a situation. But Everton benefited from their non-compliance by having a stronger team, getting more points in the season, and avoiding relegation. The penalty needs to include a real deterrent, otherwise clubs in future would just ignore the rules in order to avoid relegation. Hence the hefty points deduction.

In future, the PL wants cases to be judged and punished in the season in which they occur. This is an honourable objective, but as the commission pointed out in the Everton case, this objective should not be allowed to hamper a club on its defence against charges.

 

[Paladin]

That statement doesn’t stand up to scrutiny though does it? Ignored the PL guidelines is easy to say but, then they imposed the sanction the PL were demanding? Masters has made it look likes he’s unduly influenced the process, even if he hasn’t.

I agree. Masters has made a complete hash of the Everton case, and even more off a mess of ours. He's clearly acting on orders. He's recommended a severe punishment for Everton, so that the precedent is set for an even more severe punishment for us.

People are beginning to see straight through all this nonsense, and his days must be numbered.

 

[cheekybids]

I agree with Burnham to an extent. He said it is wrong to draw up punishment guidelines after the event, and then apply them retrospectively. The incompetent PL tried this with Everton, hence Burnham's complaint.

The commission disregarded the PL guidelines though, and applied what they thought was the correct punishment for Everton. It just so happens to be the same punishment recommended by the PL, and that has brought on a heap of additional trouble.

The PL should have just let the commission get on with their job, without interfering.

Burnham also said the proper way to draw up punishment guidelines is to have them discussed by all members clubs and to agree a fair set of guidelines with a vote. Again, another example of the incompetence of Masters and the PL. Masters' position is fast becoming untenable.

Burnham has come out fighting for Everton because it’s troubled his team but he said absolutely nothing to defend the club of the City he represents. The City that has been transformed by the same people accused of dishonesty.

It’s typical of a politician fighting for self interest & not the people he represents.

 

[JewelZee]

If they find us guilty of certain charges, then there is a possibility that we might have acted fraudulently. But this would be a consequence of the findings. None of the charges against us mention fraud.

I understand, but other than the failure to cooperate charges, the other charges would require that we acted fraudulently in order for us to be found to have broken any rules...because of the nature of the charges you can't have one without the other, in essence "we have found you in violation of our rules because you acted fraudulently"...I don't see that happening...

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I agree with Burnham to an extent. He said it is wrong to draw up punishment guidelines after the event, and then apply them retrospectively. The incompetent PL tried this with Everton, hence Burnham's complaint.

The commission disregarded the PL guidelines though, and applied what they thought was the correct punishment for Everton. It just so happens to be the same punishment recommended by the PL, and that has brought on a heap of additional trouble.

The PL should have just let the commission get on with their job, without interfering.

Burnham also said the proper way to draw up punishment guidelines is to have them discussed by all members clubs and to agree a fair set of guidelines with a vote. Again, another example of the incompetence of Masters and the PL. Masters' position is fast becoming untenable.

I don’t believe the sanction being the same as that suggested by Masters is just a co-incidence. It is not a fair sanction for Everton overspending by 6.5m a season. Everton gained no sporting advantage over anyone because the money was wasted. Masters is not credible and nor was the process by which he got the job.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Is that because she's lost all her teeth?

Probably a discrete question for Rooney that mate.

 

[KS55]

In respect of Rosen, you have to trust that such a well respected KC isn't going to tarnish his own reputation by showing a bias when it comes to judging the evidence. There are highly experienced lawyers on both sides of the argument whose presence will demand a fair hearing and outcome.

In the Everton case, the PL and the commission both agreed that a sporting sanction was appropriate, because of the nature of the charges and the possible benefit Everton gained from their breaches of the rules.

The Bluemoon experts on our charges say that our charges give us minor financial advantages that would not have caused FFP breaches of the magnitude of Everton's, and should not lead to sporting sanctions.

Maybe BUT, as the saying goes, justice must not only be done it must be seen to be done.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Its.

that,

 

[halfcenturyup]

The commission isn't set up to find us guilty of fraud. We only stand accused of breaking PL rules. That's the only thing commission will look at.

Breaking PL rules by not providing them with accounts which show a true and fair view. That can only happen for two reasons. One, the PL disagrees with the management and the auditors on some accounting treatments. Goid luck with that one. Or two, management didn't fulfill their responsibility to disclose everything to the auditors that they needed to determine a true and fair view. Sounds pretty "fraudy" to me.

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

“So let it be written, so let it be done” -:)

Are we being sent to the Sinai?

 

[dickie davies]

I don’t believe the sanction being the same as that suggested by Masters is just a co-incidence. It is not a fair sanction for Everton overspending by 6.5m a season. Everton gained no sporting advantage over anyone because the money was wasted. Masters is not credible and nor was the process by which he got the job.

Transfer wise, have they overspent by 6.5m a season though!
That's what it nets down to but I'm thinking 6.5m is amortisation, so you should multiply it by five to give the true total

Why ban an athlete for doping if they didn't win the race?

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

There still seems to be a misconception of what City have been accused of and how that is different to Everton. To recap, Everton were found guilty of breaking rules and were punished. City aren't accused of breaking rules, they are accused of circumventing processes to get around the rules. So what will be looked at is if City got an unfair advantage by using loopholes to comply with rules, that they basically 'massaged' these processes so they could comply. So that will take ages as it isn't a cut and dry 'Yes/No' Did City break known rules decision. Each charge would need to be examined to see if it was in the spirit of the rules, if there is a precedent for the way City applied their mechanisms and so on.

The way to look at it would be imagine doping in athletics and Everton and City are athletes. Everton have had a sample show that there are traces of nandrolone in their system. They've admitted it. They've got their penalty.

City have taken the same test and it is clear. However some investigators have said City have been eating an absolute shit ton of Wakame seaweed which has a naturally occurring source of a performance enhancing substance and City are saying they ate it because it contained antioxidants which have health advantages. They also say they've been up front about eating this seaweed for years and years and that they did this because it gave them a health improvement but in a natural, legally compliant way. They also say that they used an extensive network of medical experts to design this nutrition program based on seaweed, that all of the details of this program are readily available to inspect and that these medical experts have guaranteed that the program was fully legal even though it gave them an advantage.

Prosecutors are saying that City actually ate the seaweed for the performance enhancement substance but using the antioxidant argument to remain compliant. They'll therefore investigate in detail all the different medical programs to try and ascertain the intention behind the scheme. Problem with this is it is one man's word against the other.

What then will happen is the PL will say City are guilty, here's a 30 point penalty. City will then say 'fuck you, we took advice that our schemes were totally legal, you've know about these for fucking ages, we are suing you right back'. City will then unleash the legal forces of darkness and this will go on for absolute fucking AGES.

By the time it is concluded one way or the other the following things will have happened;

- Pep will have left long ago
- City will have won numerous additional trophies in this time
- Spurs will still have won fuck all
- United will once again be 'back this time, honest'

If anyone thinks this will be wrapped up within a couple of years they are sorely mistaken.

I’m going to start ordering some seaweed takeaway. Some egg fried rice perhaps too if it has nutritional benefits.

Like the post btw

 

[dickie davies]

By the time it is concluded one
If anyone thinks this will be wrapped up within a couple of years they are sorely mistaken.

Or in 12/24 months time, the independent regulator is in place, skim reads the evidence, takes more independent advice and upon hearing the advice, drops the charges

 

[Betterdeedthan red]

Assuming City are guilty then?

No .
Absolutely not.
But I don't think that will come into it.
The whole thing is a witch hunt

 

[paulchapo]

There still seems to be a misconception of what City have been accused of and how that is different to Everton. To recap, Everton were found guilty of breaking rules and were punished. City aren't accused of breaking rules, they are accused of circumventing processes to get around the rules. So what will be looked at is if City got an unfair advantage by using loopholes to comply with rules, that they basically 'massaged' these processes so they could comply. So that will take ages as it isn't a cut and dry 'Yes/No' Did City break known rules decision. Each charge would need to be examined to see if it was in the spirit of the rules, if there is a precedent for the way City applied their mechanisms and so on.

The way to look at it would be imagine doping in athletics and Everton and City are athletes. Everton have had a sample show that there are traces of nandrolone in their system. They've admitted it. They've got their penalty.

City have taken the same test and it is clear. However some investigators have said City have been eating an absolute shit ton of Wakame seaweed which has a naturally occurring source of a performance enhancing substance and City are saying they ate it because it contained antioxidants which have health advantages. They also say they've been up front about eating this seaweed for years and years and that they did this because it gave them a health improvement but in a natural, legally compliant way. They also say that they used an extensive network of medical experts to design this nutrition program based on seaweed, that all of the details of this program are readily available to inspect and that these medical experts have guaranteed that the program was fully legal even though it gave them an advantage.

Prosecutors are saying that City actually ate the seaweed for the performance enhancement substance but using the antioxidant argument to remain compliant. They'll therefore investigate in detail all the different medical programs to try and ascertain the intention behind the scheme. Problem with this is it is one man's word against the other.

What then will happen is the PL will say City are guilty, here's a 30 point penalty. City will then say 'fuck you, we took advice that our schemes were totally legal, you've know about these for fucking ages, we are suing you right back'. City will then unleash the legal forces of darkness and this will go on for absolute fucking AGES.

By the time it is concluded one way or the other the following things will have happened;

- Pep will have left long ago
- City will have won numerous additional trophies in this time
- Spurs will still have won fuck all
- United will once again be 'back this time, honest'

If anyone thinks this will be wrapped up within a couple of years they are sorely mistaken.

Or......an independent regulator is appointed, looks at our case and says to the premier league, "What the fuck is this pile of horseshit??? Drop it now!"