PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[bobbyowenquiff]

Before it gets retracted ;-)

This doesn't surprise me. Ratclliffe would not have appointed Berrada (who handled our sponsorships) if there was anything serious against City. He would have done a lot of due diligence. I also think Ratcliffe may be trying to distance himself from the previous regime at United, especially Woodward and Gill who were more fixated on undermining City than they were in driving United forward. You can also be pretty sure that Ratcliffe knows how weak the evidence is against City because the previous Directors at MUFC were in the loop with Masters. I would not be surprised if Masters was cut loose from his role at the PL sooner rather than later.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Just to add that I know @Manchester33 outside of this forum and he’s 100% genuine. While I wouldn’t want to go cracking open the champagne until such a time as the verdict is announced and it’s gone our way, this is now 2 totally different sources in the space of a little over 24 hours hinting at the same thing.

Plus Cheesman's random Facebook post a few weeks back.

 

[christopp]

A Rag mate… best ignoring -:)

Haha one that can be trusted it seems

 

[SouthStandStander]

Plus Cheesman's random Facebook post a few weeks back.

What post?

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Plus Cheesman's random Facebook post a few weeks back.

What was that?

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

Just checked it and it was 2014 after we were fined and the squad reduced by UEFA.

He's done everything possible to prove our innocence. We took the CAS verdict with good grace, despite the fine for non-cooperation.

Therefore we have a precedent as to what we will accept and what we won’t.

None of us know for sure what the outcome will be and how City will react to a partial victory.

Saying there is no chance that we’d accept a fine for non-cooperation isn’t true though. We might or might not.

All we have is our own opinions. None are wrong at the moment anyway!

I've not read every post but are you talking about the "rather spend the 30 million" quote here? If so, the chronology is as below but, of course, we didn't find out about the quote until the original DS leaks.


Simon Cliff said in an email sent at at the end of April 2014: "Khaldoon said he would rather spend 30 million on the 50 best lawyers in the world to sue them for the next 10 years." The football association, according to the email, now had the possibility "to avoid the destruction of their rules and organization."

Khaldoon was talking figuratively. We settled with UEFA the following month in May 2014 so he didn't the need the 50 best lawyers etc,

So, we took the pinch. We were happy with the settlement. It was paradoxically a good deal for us (according to prestwichblue and I agree with him).

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I've not read every post but are you talking about the "rather spend the 30 million" quote here? If so, the chronology is as below but, of course, we didn't find out about the quote until the original DS leaks.


Simon Cliff said in an email sent at at the end of April 2014: "Khaldoon said he would rather spend 30 million on the 50 best lawyers in the world to sue them for the next 10 years." The football association, according to the email, now had the possibility "to avoid the destruction of their rules and organization."

Khaldoon was talking figuratively. We settled with UEFA the following month in May 2014 so he didn't the need the 50 best lawyers etc,

So, we took the pinch. We were happy with the settlement. It was paradoxically a good deal for us (according to prestwichblue and I agree with him).

Yeah and my reasoning would be that if we were fined for non-cooperation again, we might be happy with that settlement again as it concludes the process and it can be put to bed.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

You may well be right. We just don’t have the info to know anything for sure.

We don't have concrete information. But this forum is a great crowdsourcing tool because a lot of people on it have connections with the club and other sources within football and politics and get titbits of information from time to time. When you add all these titbits up you can see the bigger picture.
This forum called the Uefa investigation right most of the time and also the CAS decision. There are always a few rabbit holes but I trust the information on this forum more than any other football media source when it comes to City. It is required reading for most of the football media, some of whom made fools of themselves with their coverage of CAS.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

We all witnessed after CAS found no evidence to substantiate any charges that our failure to cooperate fully still rendered us cheats and still does to this day.

There is no fucking way that City will be accepting a failure to cooperate charge this time.

I'd hope that we get a different result from CAS. I can see why City were fined, as they had openly stopped cooperating, and with CAS saying that the evidence they provided eventually may even have seen UEFA dropping the case, it's essentially a warning not to waste CAS's time.

If City are arguing that they've always cooperated here, then surely there's more hope that the bar for non-cooperation isn't met.

To is is my take. There’s no sense we haven’t handed anything over. More h to at what may be being asked for is excessive and unreasonable

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

I'm puzzled over the charges related to non-cooperation. CAS concluded that we had cooperated fully with CAS after lodging our appeal but that, had we cooperated fully with UEFA before and after the alleged leaks UEFA would have dropped the charges. In the present proceedings City claim to have provided them with a large body of irrefutable evidence - presumably the evidence put before CAS which proved that the charges laid by UEFA were false. Now, the PL charges seem to go over the same ground as UEFA's and therefore City's evidence would appear to be truly irrefutable UNLESS the PL have compelling NEW evidence. We'll never know, but if the charges are to collapse the PL may defend itself by arguing - in an attempt to fend off an independent regulator - that it was City's awkwardness that made it such a "difficult" and "complicated" case. Whether that would satisfy H M government seems unlikely. What Khaldoon would make of it.... Or whether Masters will just say, "I'm off. Get your independent regulator in and let him sort those red bastards out."