PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

halfcenturyup said:
This is interesting. A pretty good indication they couldn't get what they wanted from the club. A good sign I suppose. Also may be a sign the non-cooperation allegation didn't go as planned either?
Click to expand...

Setting the scene for when the silly cunts roll out the “we couldn’t find any evidence cos city had been sly cunts and conducted all their cheating on devices we don’t have the power to access. But we’re learning from this process and putting measures in place to avoid this in future”.
 
I've lost count of the times we've heard "Premier League, corrupt as fuck" sung with gusto at many a PL ground.

The lone Club who are intent on exposing the corruption & cleaning up the PL, are vilified as cheats by the very same people. Engagement with these people is futile. Attempting to converse with these people is futile. These people do not do heated debate. These people are idiots. Do not attempt to reason with these people, it's an exercise in futility.

Thank you.
 

Premier League seeks power to access club premises during investigations​

  • Ability to enter buildings would relate to financial rules
  • It could be used if club has not complied with inquiry

Exclusive by Paul MacInnes
Wed 12 Feb 2025 15.12 GMT
Share


The Premier League has asked its clubs for expanded investigatory powers, including the right to access club premises, as part of new financial rules.

The proposals are included in the latest draft of the squad cost ratio (SCR) mechanism which is expected to replace the profitability and sustainability rules that limit spending.


It is understood that the league has asked for the ability to enter buildings in the event that a club is found not to have complied with an inquiry it has initiated. Such a power is commonly used by law enforcement agencies to seize documents related to an investigation.

  • Under existing rules, clubs are expected to give “full, complete and prompt assistance” to any Premier League inquiry, but should this fail to happen the league must resort to fines, a tribunal or the Football Association to resolve the problem.

Premier League sources played down any suggestion that such powers would be the equivalent of a dawn raid. Clubs would be given notice and any intervention would be at an agreed time, they said. However, the powers the league is seeking to acquire would be stronger than those proposed for the Independent Regulator for English Football, which must, under the current drafting of the bill, request a warrant from a tribunal or court before taking action.

Debate over the SCR rules has heated up before the latest Premier League shareholders’ meeting in a central London hotel on Thursday. Last week the Professional Footballers’ Association wrote to the league and its 20 clubs warning of possible legal action were the rules to be voted through at the meeting.

The letter, which was first reported by PA Media, argued the union had not been given timely access to documentation and claimed the “withholding of relevant documentation pertaining to the proposals is clear evidence of [the league’s] failure to comply with its duties”. The letter also suggested the league had failed in its obligations to properly discuss the measures through the professional football negotiating and consultative committee (PFNCC), which comprises representatives of the PFA, EFL, Premier League and FA.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...during-investigations#EmailSignup-skip-link-8
In a statement issued in response to the letter, the Premier League said: “We strongly disagree with the PFA’s views regarding the proposed financial rules and the consultation process we are conducting with our clubs and other stakeholders. We have complied with PFNCC requirements and the PFA has had multiple opportunities since March 2024 to provide feedback on the rules and the principles that underpin them.”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________
So going back to CAS, the PL believe that CAS awarding UEFA damages for non cooperation, legitimises their right to information not specified in the rule book, and for 2 years the PL investigated, then the PL employed forensic data experts, and within weeks they had charged City with the 115. 35 of them being non cooperation.
All companies have a right to upgrade their policies, but in doing so they have to follow a set routine, first of they have to prove accuracy, then they have to test the policy then they have to produce a method of using the policy, that is not discriminatory, and inform all parties of it`s usage. Needless to say the PL did none of these despite multiple opportunities so it does look like the PL has failed with 35 charges.
On the suing of the PL, the PL are using the same Panel in the hope of the same outcome, but City may well have 35 cases of victimization to add.
Of course it maybe just coincidental that the PL is asking to change it`s policies.
 
salfordbluetrue said:

Premier League seeks power to access club premises during investigations​

  • Ability to enter buildings would relate to financial rules
  • It could be used if club has not complied with inquiry

Exclusive by Paul MacInnes
Wed 12 Feb 2025 15.12 GMT
Share


The Premier League has asked its clubs for expanded investigatory powers, including the right to access club premises, as part of new financial rules.

The proposals are included in the latest draft of the squad cost ratio (SCR) mechanism which is expected to replace the profitability and sustainability rules that limit spending.


It is understood that the league has asked for the ability to enter buildings in the event that a club is found not to have complied with an inquiry it has initiated. Such a power is commonly used by law enforcement agencies to seize documents related to an investigation.

  • Under existing rules, clubs are expected to give “full, complete and prompt assistance” to any Premier League inquiry, but should this fail to happen the league must resort to fines, a tribunal or the Football Association to resolve the problem.

Premier League sources played down any suggestion that such powers would be the equivalent of a dawn raid. Clubs would be given notice and any intervention would be at an agreed time, they said. However, the powers the league is seeking to acquire would be stronger than those proposed for the Independent Regulator for English Football, which must, under the current drafting of the bill, request a warrant from a tribunal or court before taking action.

Debate over the SCR rules has heated up before the latest Premier League shareholders’ meeting in a central London hotel on Thursday. Last week the Professional Footballers’ Association wrote to the league and its 20 clubs warning of possible legal action were the rules to be voted through at the meeting.

The letter, which was first reported by PA Media, argued the union had not been given timely access to documentation and claimed the “withholding of relevant documentation pertaining to the proposals is clear evidence of [the league’s] failure to comply with its duties”. The letter also suggested the league had failed in its obligations to properly discuss the measures through the professional football negotiating and consultative committee (PFNCC), which comprises representatives of the PFA, EFL, Premier League and FA.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...during-investigations#EmailSignup-skip-link-8
In a statement issued in response to the letter, the Premier League said: “We strongly disagree with the PFA’s views regarding the proposed financial rules and the consultation process we are conducting with our clubs and other stakeholders. We have complied with PFNCC requirements and the PFA has had multiple opportunities since March 2024 to provide feedback on the rules and the principles that underpin them.”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________
So going back to CAS, the PL believe that CAS awarding UEFA damages for non cooperation, legitimises their right to information not specified in the rule book, and for 2 years the PL investigated, then the PL employed forensic data experts, and within weeks they had charged City with the 115. 35 of them being non cooperation.
All companies have a right to upgrade their policies, but in doing so they have to follow a set routine, first of they have to prove accuracy, then they have to test the policy then they have to produce a method of using the policy, that is not discriminatory, and inform all parties of it`s usage. Needless to say the PL did none of these despite multiple opportunities so it does look like the PL has failed with 35 charges.
On the suing of the PL, the PL are using the same Panel in the hope of the same outcome, but City may well have 35 cases of victimization to add.
Of course it maybe just coincidental that the PL is asking to change it`s policies.
Click to expand...
Presumably, they will enlist the Stasi to do the work.
And and and, they must keep up their end of the bargain and not, for example, leak discussions between a club and the league. Some hope!
 
Stoned Rose said:
Setting the scene for when the silly cunts roll out the “we couldn’t find any evidence cos city had been sly cunts and conducted all their cheating on devices we don’t have the power to access. But we’re learning from this process and putting measures in place to avoid this in future”.
Click to expand...
They could still seize our abacus boards though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top