PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Sheikh rattle and roll]

The bit I really do not get is 4 years to complete an investigation. Was it carried out by the office junior who picked it up and put down when they got bored or had to go on day release?

4 years, teams could win lots of trophies in 4 years and yes, I know it’s unlikely but a team could possibly win 4 consecutive premier league titles ;-)

Thousands or millions of documents to obtain and examine
Plus litigation at every step
I understand why it’s taken 4 years

 

[halfcenturyup]

Surely they can ask who they want they just cannot demand but even if the rules say you ask the club that doesn’t stop them asking the other people. And surly the rules cannot make the club provide stuff from third parties they have no control over

Do you think the rules prohibit them asking Mancini directly

Seems that way to me. Of course, I could be wrong.

 

[cheekybids]

These are the latest rules around power of inquiry and provision of information:
View attachment 132551
View attachment 132552

And the definitions of Manager / Official, just for the record:
View attachment 132553
View attachment 132554

Seems to me that says that the PL's power of inquiry is only to the current manager and the current officials, and the information that they can provide. And that they can ask for information from anyone else where the club is "able to do so". Many ways to say you aren't able to do so, I would imagine, and then miraculously turn up with it at the panel.

Edit: I may be wrong. It has been known occasionally :)

it’s ridiculous isn’t it.

 

[dickie davies]

Impossible to prove he did not.

One five minute zoom call a month

 

[halfcenturyup]

it’s ridiculous isn’t it.

It's great :)

 

[Joe Donachie]

Has anyone seen the Stephen howson video that he did yesterday about if we get off with these charges??

 

[dickie davies]

Agreed but that was down to our club and one worry I have in the back of my mind about this latest action and if our evidence is irrefutable.

But if we are found not guilty, the innuendo has to stop.

The whatsapp group will always say "City, who were charged by the Premier League of financial irregularities"
There will always be the constant reminders that the club was charged. Just like they remind us the club was banned from European competitions

 

[KS55]

As you well know, you don't use a witness who can harm your case more than they can help it. I can't believe they expect to land the Mancini-related charges.

Given the outcome at CAS, I also can't believe they expect they can land the sponsorship charges. If I'm right that they knew about Fordham back in 2015, and neither UEFA nor the PL did anything at the time or subsequently, then they surely can't be confident they can land that either. So why do this?

We've speculated that it's just to damage our reputation, which looks more and more like a rational explanation, plus they might hope to get us on the non-cooperation allegations. Given the cost of this to the PL, if I was one of the non-cartel member clubs of the PL, I'd be asking some very searching questions once this is over.

The non cartel clubs won’t ask awkward questions— they are purblind, viz: sign here hateful eight:
ok.

 

[give it to gordon]

I think this is close to the truth. The PL could have got out after CAS. But Masters was under pressure from key club directors who wanted to damage City at all costs irrespective of any evidence. Masters is stupid and weak. Don’t underestimate how stupid he is. He was grossly over promoted and has no skillset to be a CEO,

I don't understand how the non cartel clubs have just sat back and allowed the cartel clubs to use their money to fund this hearing.
Some non cartel clubs have had points deducted, some have had to sell players to get I side the financial rules.
Yet one cartel club with nearly a billion in debt failed UEFA ffp and did a deal worth 75million with the pl not to be charged.

Why are these non cartel clubs just sitting back and doing nothing ?

 

[dickie davies]

City should then call him as a witness for the defence job done

If you were made redundant in what you believe was a wholly unfair decision, would you do that company a favour 12 years later by defending them in court?