PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[jonmcity]

Allot of these charges are to do with none cooperation. If the fa can prove we didn't supply reasonable information to questions asked, how serious is that? Even if we can prove we are innocent of all charges? Is there any historical measure to compare the possible sanction? Are they able to just make up a sanction, or does it have to be reasonable and fair for the alleged misconduct?

 

[Marvin.]

I don’t see how you can suggest the allegations are the same as CAS plus some other things and then say they are not serious. City themselves said they were “very serious”. The word “serious” appears TWENTY FIVE times in the CAS decision.

And I am certain the disclosure in the PL case is far beyond CAS which was extremely limited on any basis and insufficient to prove the alleged fraudulent conspiracy. Again, we don’t need to speculate - these are City’s words.

BTW I am not suggesting every aspect of the PLs behaviour is “entirely rational”. On the contrary, I’ve criticised lots of aspects even from the limited amount we know. But I think it is very dangerous to underestimate the other side when it is manned with some of the best quality lawyers in the country who would simply not pursue a hopeless case.

Fortunately, it is crystal clear, City have taken the whole matter very seriously hiring a huge squad of high quality specialists with a money no object approach.

Personally, I accept on the face of the emails, there has been a case to answer (ignoring the debate about whether it’s fair/legal for the PL to go after a case essentially the same as CAS, if they have)

I’ve been burned in litigation too many times to take anything for granted, to be too confident or to underestimate opponents even where I think they are totally wrong on something.

The UEFA /CAS case dealt with the emails. If the PL have re-run this case with no new evidence it will be a scandal given what they have put City staff and fans through. I suspect that that is exactly what they have done.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Allot of these charges are to do with none cooperation. If the fa can prove we didn't supply reasonable information to questions asked, how serious is that? Even if we can prove we are innocent of all charges? Is there any historical measure to compare the possible sanction? Are they able to just make up a sanction, or does it have to be reasonable and fair for the alleged misconduct?

It's not the FA, it's the PL !!

 

[malg]

You’ve caught a couple already ;)

It's easier on here than it's ever been. Maybe because we've been shite people are just a bit touchier

 

[slbsn]

The UEFA /CAS case dealt with the emails. If the PL have re-run this case with no new evidence it will be a scandal given what they have put City staff and fans through. I suspect that that is exactly what they have done.

They inarguably have many more documents. Again City have said this themselves.

 

[Giovinco]

They inarguably have many more documents. Again City have said this themselves.

The allegation made in the recent bbc podcast by the German fella at Der Speigal indicated that city chose which documents to release at CAS.

Have city had to provide everything relevant to the case?

 

[slbsn]

The allegation made in the recent bbc podcast by the German fella at Der Speigal indicated that city chose which documents to release at CAS.

Have city had to provide everything relevant to the case?

Yes (subject to English law debates on disclosure)

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

Sorry if already posted but award winning journalist Connor Humm from football insider says we're getting charged with ' a lot' of the 115 charges and will get a transfer ban in the coming months. We're fucked guys Connor has wrote.

His profile has him in an Arsenal shirt, pmsl

Football Insider is a site I never look at because it is 100% shite.

 

[BamberBridgeBlue]

I don’t see how you can suggest the allegations are the same as CAS plus some other things and then say they are not serious. City themselves said they were “very serious”. The word “serious” appears TWENTY FIVE times in the CAS decision.

And I am certain the disclosure in the PL case is far beyond CAS which was extremely limited on any basis and insufficient to prove the alleged fraudulent conspiracy. Again, we don’t need to speculate - these are City’s words.

BTW I am not suggesting every aspect of the PLs behaviour is “entirely rational”. On the contrary, I’ve criticised lots of aspects even from the limited amount we know. But I think it is very dangerous to underestimate the other side when it is manned with some of the best quality lawyers in the country who would simply not pursue a hopeless case.

Fortunately, it is crystal clear, City have taken the whole matter very seriously hiring a huge squad of high quality specialists with a money no object approach.

Personally, I accept on the face of the emails, there has been a case to answer (ignoring the debate about whether it’s fair/legal for the PL to go after a case essentially the same as CAS, if they have)

I’ve been burned in litigation too many times to take anything for granted, to be too confident or to underestimate opponents even where I think they are totally wrong on something.

I haven’t really engaged with you before, because I’m not of a legal mind. I’ve followed with interest that some of the Bluemooners have turned you. I recognise in myself the requirement to select my favourite facts that point to City’s innocence for confirmation bias. You were correct when you said some people just want to hear what they want to hear. I just feel like the financial restrictions being imposed are almost exclusive to football. I also believe that justice is the preserve of those who can afford it, and City can. I do understand though your reticence to commit. As you said, you’ve had your fingers burned.

 

[Giovinco]

Yes (subject to English law debates on disclosure)

I guess the concern is that city have been forced to release documentation which was not made available prior to announcement of the charge sheet and subsequent trial.

Here’s hoping there is no smoking gun

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Could it also be they've backed themselves into a corner, are consequently fighting for survival in their jobs, so feel they have nothing to lose and have come out all guns blazing, bulls in a china shop? My feeling from how they've dealt with City is of people short on humility and magnanimity in the last chance saloon. They were hoping the UEFA action would do the job, but had to resort to Plan B after CAS. How they messed up the initial annoucement of the charges was Keystone Cops, which together with the 2 subsequent APT reversals, doesn't inspire confidence in the substance of their actions.

The published evidence in the Judges' statements from the APT1 case fills me with confidence. It shows a staggering level of incompetence from a team of PL Execs who, amongst other things, ignored the advice of their own lawyers. I am confident that Masters really is as stupid as he seemed when he appeared in front of the Commons Select Committee. You may recall in the first appearance he (along with Rick Parry) was told directly by the Committee Chair: "It would appear you don't know what you are doing." If it walks like a duck.....it's a duck.

 

[Marvin.]

They inarguably have many more documents. Again City have said this themselves.

Perhaps they do but I think the purpose was just to drown City with innuendo and exhaust City. But as others have said, it's best to be open minded and I admit that I am not.

 

[Gogootz]

Of course, my mistake.
There’s also the red fanzine writer bellend Dan Harris at the guardian. Seems like any hack with that surname is a City-hating tool

There's also Gumbo Harris but they keep him locked up in the basement where the other 3 should be

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I don't disagree with any of that except the first line.

The charges don't appear serious, they are serious. The F365 headline on p8367 illustrates the point neatly. What has been alleged IS corporate fraud. The evidence relied on in support of those allegations may well turn out to be a pile of horseshit, and from what we know of it it IS a pile of horseshit, but that doesn't make it any less serious an allegation.

The Mancini stuff is a good example. So far as we can tell, he had a contract with us and a contract with Al Jazeera for some consulting. The allegation is that this was actually City paying Mancini some disguised remuneration beyond that stated in the accounts.

To make that allegation stick the PL would have to show that Mancini and City AND Al Jazeera all conspired and colluded to agree to contracts that all three knew were shams - "sham" in the technical legal sense, meaning something that ALL the parties knew was untrue. That, again, is tantamount to an allegation of fraud.

Forget the fact that there's no obvious reason for the club to have done so, forget the fact that there seems to be bugger all evidence to support that allegation, forget the fact that it's essentially impossible to prove that without putting that very serious allegation not only to City but also to Al Jazeera and to Mancini himself in the witness box, it is a very serious accusation. The charge involves an allegation that a dishonest and unlawful conspiracy was entered into and carried out by MCFC, Mancini and Al Jazeera. It doesn't matter if there's fuck all evidence to support the charge, the charge is serious.

You may well be proved entirely right that the process is the punishment, and the fact that the PL might have embarked upon very serious charges with very little prospect of success may beg further questions, but the seriousness of the charges is defined by what is alleged, not by the evidence that is relied on.

If the PL were taking their own charges seriously surely they would have reported them to the Serious Fraud Office. That's what happens with allegations of corporate fraud.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

They inarguably have many more documents. Again City have said this themselves.

City are referring to the detailed documents we have supplied to the PL to refute the allegations. We have no idea what the PL have got in their evidence.

 

[slbsn]

City are referring to the detailed documents we have supplied to the PL to refute the allegations. We have no idea what the PL have got in their evidence.

Even if that was correct (and it’s not) that would still be far more information than was used at CAS. And the requirements of disclosure under both the PL rules and English law are for parties to disclose relevant documents regardless of whether they support the defence or the allegations. By the time of the charges, the PL had a lot of documents and emails from City.

 

[slbsn]

If the PL were taking their own charges seriously surely they would have reported them to the Serious Fraud Office. That's what happens with allegations of corporate fraud.

It would be rare for an organisation like the PL to involve the SFO. In the mind of the PL this is a disciplinary matter under its rules. And by no means all allegations of accounting fraud involves the SFO. In fact, very few matters do.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It would be rare for an organisation like the PL to involve the SFO. In the mind of the PL this is a disciplinary matter under its rules. And by no means all allegations of accounting fraud involves the SFO. In fact, very few matters do.

But you would have thought the SFO would get involved (even informally) not least because the allegations ultimately target very senior people like Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon who do a lot of big deals with the British Government. It is very politically sensitive. There must have been conversations at the highest levels. The SFO don't investigate every allegation they receive but they are always in the loop on politically sensitive issues like this.

 

[slbsn]

But you would have thought the SFO would get involved (even informally) not least because the allegations ultimately target very senior people like Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon who do a lot of big deals with the British Government. It is very politically sensitive. There must have been conversations at the highest levels. The SFO don't investigate every allegation they receive but they are always in the loop on politically sensitive issues like this.

The SFO may or may not be monitoring. But right now it tells us nothing because we don’t know.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

The SFO may or may not be monitoring. But right now it tells us nothing because we don’t know.

I think you are right to urge caution because there is always risk in any legal case but I can't help feeling optimistic because there are just no obvious external signals that imply the PL has overwhelming evidence and City are in the shit.