PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Man City Till I Die - Facebook

Lord Pannick KC who’s leading the City group in representing Manchester City vs the Premier League was pictured smiling outside the International Dispute Resolution Centre earlier YESTERDAY when he came out of court.

Does that smile make you think we are about to lose the biggest case in sports history? No because we have the best representing us.

IMG_3120.jpeg
 
Man City Till I Die - Facebook

Lord Pannick KC who’s leading the City group in representing Manchester City vs the Premier League was pictured smiling outside the International Dispute Resolution Centre earlier YESTERDAY when he came out of court.

Does that smile make you think we are about to lose the biggest case in sports history? No because we have the best representing us.

View attachment 132257
Haha we’re clutching at straws here but I’ll take it
 
Man City Till I Die - Facebook

Lord Pannick KC who’s leading the City group in representing Manchester City vs the Premier League was pictured smiling outside the International Dispute Resolution Centre earlier YESTERDAY when he came out of court.

Does that smile make you think we are about to lose the biggest case in sports history? No because we have the best representing us.

View attachment 132257
Maybe he just checked the saldo on his bank account.
 
I agree although there may be some elements of the defence based on prior/contemporaneous knowledge eg showing the PL knew about Mancinis consultancy maybe or Fordham etc. So could be extracting that confirmation from the PL. And perhaps something relevant on cooperation. Maybe
They must have been aware of Fordham as UEFA spoke to us about it in 2014 or 2015. As the PL act as the FFP licensor, they were surely either involved or at least aware of these discussions. And Fordham was visibly linked to City, specifically the Manchester City Sports Image Rights company, on the Companies House website. It's inconceivable that the Der Spiegel articles were the first they'd heard about Fordham.

I'd have thought if we could show that the PL were acting under pressure from certain clubs, following the pretty definitive CAS outcome, that would have some impact on our case and that it was potentially vexatious rather than principled.
 
Last edited:
I’d suggest hacking another club’s scouting database would quite clearly be classed as “bad faith”, but clearly the PL deem that normal practice, dependent only on who hacked and who got hacked.
It is subjective to be sure, there are definite bad faith actions, and definite not bad faith actions, but the borderland between them is very fuzzy. I guess that’s what judges are for - to make that call.
Not only bad faith but criminal and should have been reported to the law for prosecution under the Computer Misuse Act 1990 with a potential a jail sentence
 
They ducked out of the dipper charge by claiming it was all settled up between the two clubs. Personally I think it was insane letting the dippers away with it but subsequently read on here that considerations regarding GDPR and possible severe sanctions softened our cough in relation to this matter.
I don't believe that GDPR was an issue the serve sanction could have been a jail sentence for the perpetrators and as ex employees of City there might have been an element of compassion
 
I will give it a read. On Talksport he was basically saying they haven't done anything wrong, the premier league accepted their large claims of losses and other clubs should have followed suit.
That simply doesn't make sense. City Liverpool and a couple of London clubs could all make a similar amount from a pre season tour and yet, according to you, they all, for some unknown reason under declared. Why would they do that?
 
The best evidence of our innocence is the silence, no whistle-blowers, former players, managers, ex-executive staff. If we'd have conspired to do what we're accused of over 15 years, well, just think rationally.
Bit like the moon landing conspiracy. You couldnt keep that amount of people quiet for that amount of time if something was amiss
 
Apologies if already asked, but I've not been on the forum for a few days and haven't got the time to plough through hundreds of pages. With regard to United's losses, I believe they were allowed to deduct £40m for Covid, and £35m for the expenses of the club sale, but weren't their 3 year losses around £240m ??? If so, even with those discounted, the 3 year losses would still be around £165m which is STILL around £60m more than permitted losses under PSR ??
Have you never seen an old clip of Paul Daniels doing a magic trick, this is pretty much the same just without the lovely Debbie McGee.
 
They must have been aware of Fordham as UEFA spoke to us about it in 2014 or 2015. As the PL act as the FFP licensor, they were surely either involved or at least aware of these discussions. And Fordham was visibly linked to City, specifically the Manchester City Sports Image Rights company, on the Companies House website. It's inconceivable that the Der Spiegel articles were the first that they'd heard about Fordham.

I'd have thought if we could show that the PL were acting under pressure from certain clubs, following the pretty definitive CAS outcome, that would have some impact on our case and that it was potentially vexatious rather than principled.

vexatious

lovely word
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.