PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[nmc]

The fact that The Premier League makes these appointments is completely backwards. They are the ones making the accusation, they should have no control or input into the trial process. They are acting as judge, jury and executioner. Nothing about this process is independent. Add to that the fact that, the way the organisation exists today, The Premier League really is just it's own member clubs, i.e. our direct rivals, and it amounts to a massive conflict of interest.

Much the same problem as the Post Office having it's own powers of prosecution.

There's been a problem with corporate incest in the governance of football for a long time. The game in general needs a huge shake-up in how it's run, and who runs it.

PL isn’t even a decent members club. 3 or 4 members wield all the power and tell the other 16 what’s good for them.

 

[christopp]

FAQs maybe, like:

What are the charges?
Do they represent fraud?
If it's fraud why isn't this in a criminal court?
Do the allegations imply breaching FFP?
Are any of the Pl allegations time-barred?
What is Etihad about?
What is Etisalat about?
What is Mancini's contract about?
What is the image rights issue?
How long will it take?
What is likely to happen?

And general background:
When was FFP introduced by UEFA and the PL?
What are UEFA's FFP rules?
What are the PL's FFP rules?
What was the 2014 settlement about?
Why was the club banned from the CL in 2019?
What did CAS say about UEFA's case?

Edit: I could volunteer to make a start on some of them if people think it is a good idea. Would have to be checked by people smarter than me, of course. @Ric , what do you think?

Would work for me!

As much as I want to ignore it all, unfortunately it’s hanging over our heads so would be good to have a bit more insight into some of it

 

[Ric]

Would work for me!

As much as I want to ignore it all, unfortunately it’s hanging over our heads so would be good to have a bit more insight into some of it

115 Charges - FAQs

Mods, this has been a request on and off in the 115 Charges thread for some time. Feel free to move but I thought it might warrant a thread of its own. The idea here is that the information is essentially factual with very little/no opinion thrown into the mix. There are also some significant...

forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk

 

[eastlandsblue]

So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?

I don't remember him saying that we'd know in a week.
I thought he said that he couldn't say what the date is.

 

[chaddblue]

So Master said a little over 2 weeks ago “ a date had been set for our hearing “ And we’d know within a week the said date.

So unless I’ve been sleeping under a rock, have they released a date yet?

Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown

I don't think that was it either.

I don't think Ceferin said anything out of line - he basically said that the process followed had been right - and he isn't going to get involved in a PL matter that is unproven. I doubt even more that Masters knew that Ceferin was going to say something days later.

Maybe Masters expected something which didn't happen, or was just taking rubbish.

 

[Dribble]

Don't think he said that at all?

All we heard was that there would be further developments within a week and it appears that was just the slanderous comments by the UEFA clown

Masters said he couldn’t say when the hearing would be, but it was progressing.

It was the Torygraph who claimed there would be major developments the following week regarding City. All that happened was the Ceferin quotes appeared in their publication.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I don't think that was it either.

I don't think Ceferin said anything out of line - he basically said that the process followed had been right - and he isn't going to get involved in a PL matter that is unproven. I doubt even more that Masters knew that Ceferin was going to say something days later.

Maybe Masters expected something which didn't happen, or was just taking rubbish.

Much as I hate to say it, to be fair to Masters he didn't say anything about new information in a week, did he? That was the newspaper that had the Ceferin "exclusive".

 

[halfcenturyup]

Masters said he couldn’t say when the hearing would be, but it was progressing.

It was the Torygraph who claimed there would be major developments the following week regarding City. All that happened was the Ceferin quotes appeared in their publication.

What he said.