PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[WRicko]

I am curious how does everyone explain what’s going on or not going on at other clubs Chelsea United Liverpool etc strange transfer dealings sales of assets allowances Covid and sale to Jim and fake stadium.

I don’t want to be a conspiracy theorist and it’s all be signed off and United are on the stock exchange but it cannot be right. What would you say to other fans about these ?

 

[Matt Diablo]

Well, it finally happened to me today.

After playing football on a Sunday as normal the conversation switch to the Arsenal game this afternoon, just the usual good natured banter about who would win and so on, The one Rag threw in the "doesnt matter anyway once you cheating cunts get thrown out of the league" Now we have all heard this before but this time is was said with some venom and not at all meant as banter. There were a few comments back and forth and others suddenly jumped in as well. Within a minute I was facing a full on rant from 3 people with genuine anger aimed towards me. Now these are lads that I have known for years, not close mates but friends none the less. It was very close to coming to blows at one point and it was a very uncomfortable experience for me.

It does make me fear for what will happen should be be cleared of these breaches, there are a lot of very angry people out there who aren't going to be happy should it go in our favour.

You should just stand up for what you believe and make it clear this is a smear campaign and the corrupt epl's case against us is a sham and our innocence will be undeniably proven - so basically fuk on that guys.

Did the same in barbers in north London yesterday. Gooners were agreeing with me in the end! Didnt have much choice really think they saw how passionate I was about it:)

 

[Oldham Exile]

Most people reading it won’t know the issues relating to our sponsorships and that the fair value of the Etihad contract has never been challenged. So from Ronay’s article they would be led to believe that funds were being found to top up the Etihad agreement rather than pay part of it, thus giving us more revenue than we were declaring. Ronay doesn’t actually claim that the extra funds came from our owner, but fails to point out that, if that is the case, we haven’t been disguising equity as sponsorship and haven’t broken any rules.

The fella is a ****

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

I agree. The only other issue I think the PL witnesses may be important is if the PL deny knowledge of certain matters at the time. That is likely to be clear in the documents but if not, say, City's witness say they were discussed orally and the PL says they have no record of such a discussion, then some witness cross examination may be necessary. I'd say quite difficult to see how Masters has any meaningful evidence at all on the substantive matters. So PL witnesses (aside from expert witnesses) are largely a red herring.

NB: Masters did give a witness statement for Everton on the points recommendation from the PL's standpoint so that may be relevant but it is unlikely a) for this initial IC b) something for cross examination - it is more a submission by the PL.

Given the historical nature of all of the charges the individuals concerned were Garry Cook and Richard Scudamore (1999-2018), so nothing to do with Masters. Scudamore used to attend multiple games every season during his tenure. I saw him there. So what if City execs had discussions with Scudamore about eg Fordham/Toure or Mancini ?. And what if City were given informal, off the record tacit approval by Scudamore ? Today that seems highly irregular/improbable and unprofessional but this was before the relationship between City and PL deteriorated into nothing. If the PL are arguing concealment on theese issues then surely they would have to demand Scudamore is cross examined.

Eg. :"Mr Scudamore on dd/mm/2012 do you recall a meeting at the Ethihad stadium where you discussed the Fordham Image Rights scheme with City execs ....."

The point is there was NO concealment, so Time Barred. The super confident stance by the City execs can not be all just a front, a PR policy, they must know something that is very significant but remains outside the public domain.

And on the subject of emails, how could the PL object to handing over ever single of one Scudamore's and Master's premierleague.com archive ? The entire PL case, as far as we know, is on based on interpretation and extrapolation of City's emails. So how would that look to the IC if they refuse to hand over the PL emails ?, especially if any of their allegations are about concealment.

This saga is not THE CROWN v MCFC, it's a commercial contractual dispute and it is perfectly reasonable that the PL should hand over the email archive of their executive.

 

[johncity]

It is absolutely “hate” with Levy. He has a strong dislike for us, that goes without saying. Not just for commercial reasons.
And, I know for a fact, he truly hates the Saudis buying Newcastle.
He’s a despicable ****.

His levy Jewish maybe that’s why there’s so much hate for our owners fuck him is team is shit

 

[blueyorkie]

Well said John. When even the supposedly honest Conn comes out with the mendacious statement about us selecting two of the CAS panel, you know the Guardian has a clear agenda.

Conn is a viscous troll, unworthy of our attention

 

[blueyorkie]

Manchester City should be loudly applauded, not roundly condemned

It’s been a difficult week for English football. A shadow is hanging over the club I have poured my love into since 1969.

www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk

Can anyone get around the paywall?

Excellent article

 

[manimanc]

Well, it finally happened to me today.

After playing football on a Sunday as normal the conversation switch to the Arsenal game this afternoon, just the usual good natured banter about who would win and so on, The one Rag threw in the "doesnt matter anyway once you cheating cunts get thrown out of the league" Now we have all heard this before but this time is was said with some venom and not at all meant as banter. There were a few comments back and forth and others suddenly jumped in as well. Within a minute I was facing a full on rant from 3 people with genuine anger aimed towards me. Now these are lads that I have known for years, not close mates but friends none the less. It was very close to coming to blows at one point and it was a very uncomfortable experience for me.

It does make me fear for what will happen should be be cleared of these breaches, there are a lot of very angry people out there who aren't going to be happy should it go in our favour.

Should just ignore him mate.

I had some rag no mark in the shop just start chatting shit to me about the charges. He thought he was a clever **** in front of his girly but you know what I did? Totally ignored the prick. I completely blanked him, made him look like he was talking to himself. Didn't even make eye contact with him.
Oh he looked a proper plonka. I just walked off laughing to myself whilst he got himself into a fluster.

I find it really odd that these red mardarses want to confront us blues like they know us. Really I wanted to kick fuck out if him but I know silence winds them up further.
Can't wait for the next cry arse to try and get a rise out of me.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I am curious how does everyone explain what’s going on or not going on at other clubs Chelsea United Liverpool etc strange transfer dealings sales of assets allowances Covid and sale to Jim and fake stadium.

I don’t want to be a conspiracy theorist and it’s all be signed off and United are on the stock exchange but it cannot be right. What would you say to other fans about these ?

Utd's UEFA FFP? Fined after UEFA disallowed the 40 million COVID costs. Not UEFA's fault it was ignored by the press.

Utd's PL FFP? 40 million COVID costs would have been reviewed at a high level. I think the costs have to be audited. Nothing really to see here unless you believe in conspiracy.

Utd's share costs? Same as above, would have been reviewed at a high level and audited presumably. They shouldn't have been included in the club's accounts anyway, but I can't see any rule for allowing them as deductible costs. Bit weird.

Liverpool hacking? Settled between the parties.

Liverpool 50 mill Stanley Park costs? Again, would have been reviewed at high level and probably audited. Seems way too high, though. Also a bit weird.

Chelsea off-books payments? Being investigated. It takes the PL a while, bless them.

Chelsea asset sales? No rule against it in the PL so accepted, but will be disallowed by UEFA. But stupid of the PL. Surprise, not.

Strange player sales at year end? Will be reviewed for arm's length under the threshold payment rules but not sure the PL has the strength for more conflict. Threatened with "good faith" rule, but Leicester ruling may scupper that. Anyway, we will see when the accounts for 2023/24 are reviewed by the PL.

Did I miss anything?

 

[slbsn]

Given the historical nature of all of the charges the individuals concerned were Garry Cook and Richard Scudamore (1999-2018), so nothing to do with Masters. Scudamore used to attend multiple games every season during his tenure. I saw him there. So what if City execs had discussions with Scudamore about eg Fordham/Toure or Mancini ?. And what if City were given informal, off the record tacit approval by Scudamore ? Today that seems highly irregular/improbable and unprofessional but this was before the relationship between City and PL deteriorated into nothing. If the PL are arguing concealment on theese issues then surely they would have to demand Scudamore is cross examined.

Eg. :"Mr Scudamore on dd/mm/2012 do you recall a meeting at the Ethihad stadium where you discussed the Fordham Image Rights scheme with City execs ....."

The point is there was NO concealment, so Time Barred. The super confident stance by the City execs can not be all just a front, a PR policy, they must know something that is very significant but remains outside the public domain.

And on the subject of emails, how could the PL object to handing over ever single of one Scudamore's and Master's premierleague.com archive ? The entire PL case, as far as we know, is on based on interpretation and extrapolation of City's emails. So how would that look to the IC if they refuse to hand over the PL emails ?, especially if any of their allegations are about concealment.

This saga is not THE CROWN v MCFC, it's a commercial contractual dispute and it is perfectly reasonable that the PL should hand over the email archive of their executive.

We agree re Masters. But on disclosure, it is simply not how it works. Ultimately, it is safe to assume that the IC would have dealt with any disputes over disclosure at case management hearings over the last few years so by the time we get to the hearing there is nothing to infer. But there are likely to be few disagreements that go to the IC to decide.

I’d also assume the PL case is more than extrapolation of emails.