PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Oohvonkyvonky said:

Here you go mate, just put it together in my spare time:​

​

Overall Thread Summary: "PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules"​

1.​

  • The thread began on February 6, 2023. It centers on claims that Manchester City has been charged by the Premier League (PL) over alleged breaches of financial rules.
  • Fans are intensely reacting to reports, quoting pundits, insiders, and interpreting every media snippet.
  • A key focus is Financial Fair Play (FFP) and the Premier League's Profitability and Sustainability Rules; there's also ongoing discussion around potential involvement of an external regulator.

2.​

  • Misinformation & Media Interpretation
    Many users point out that pundits or talk show guests often misrepresent details. As one member puts it: “I think the answer is to never believe anything anyone says unless it's under oath.”
  • Role of a Regulator vs the Premier League
    The discourse repeatedly circles around what a regulator is supposed to do—whether they’d oversee day-to-day operations like sponsorships—or if the PL maintains sole authority over these financial rules. Observers note that whatever the plans for regulation, they seem aimed at financial sustainability, not match rules like offside.
  • UEFA’s Influence
    Some speculate that UEFA or FIFA might restrict regulator involvement in club governance, threatening sanctions or exclusion from European competition if national regulators get too heavy-handed.
  • Procedural Frustration
    There's a notable undercurrent of impatience: with so many pages filled, readers are tired of speculation, with posts like “Here's to the start of another week when fuck all happens.”
    The thread is clearly one that’s grown massive in length, with some users obviously fatigued by the slow drip of news or official updates.
  • Expert Input vs Fan Opinion
    A repeated viewpoint is that this issue requires qualified voices—lawyers, financial specialists, sports regulation experts—not just armchair pundits or fans quoting rumors.

3.​

  • Forum users are responding to comments by a woman—possibly a league official—who was discussing whether a regulator would get involved in the Premier League case and whether “rules of the game” are being mixed into financial rule enforcement.
  • One user says she “conflates the offside etc with FFP PSR,” suggesting confusion between sporting rules and financial governance.
  • Another member points out that the regulator was set up due to the Super League fallout and governance concerns, indicating a deeper context for why this is even under discussion.
  • There’s also light sarcasm—someone joking the thread title might as well be “Favourite Cheese”—evidencing how side conversation has drifted away from financial rules.


Final Thoughts​


This thread highlights the tension between fan speculation, evolving media narratives, and the opaque nature of regulatory processes in elite football. Over its thousands of pages since February 2023, it’s become a messy mix of serious debate, sarcasm, rumor, and impatience. And that 'Masters' is likely to be a nonce.
Click to expand...
AI word salad
 
When the findings are published it may only be half time. There may be a sanctions hearing and it's likely there will be appeals that could take another year to resolve. Given the final resolution of this mess is likely to be over a year off, then it's just business as usual for us. Maybe the soft signals are just a reflection of that.
 
Bournemouth Blue said:
I frankly don’t give a f*ck any more, look at the spending our rivals have done since the charges were made. The Scum are millions in Debt but spending like their wives stole their credit cards, but nobody complains.
Click to expand...

Our fucking arse licking and hypocritical media certainly don't appear to have any issues regarding the huge amounts of money which has been spent by the favoured clubs.

Now who would ever have believed that when everybody knows that only City buys players for huge amounts !
 
Last edited:

slbsn said:
I think it is a negative signal but the positive signals have kept coming
Click to expand...
Personally I don’t like the sound of that;(
If city GENUINELY don’t know the outcome or how it’s going etc,then I suspect you mean by POSITIVE SIGNALS kept coming ie Puma deal,haaland extended contract,stadium expansion,big spending in January & summer transfer windows,the only thing we know FOR SURE is its taking quite a long time…which you think is a negative signal…now that’s a FACT,and taking into account you’re knowledgeable on these types of things……extremely worrying;(
 
slbsn said:
I think it is a negative signal but the positive signals have kept coming
Click to expand...

Brady said it will be heavily redacted, what would be the reason for that?

Also she intimated about the costs which means they expect them to fall on the premier league.
 
Make no mistake about it - Karen Brady is very much a part of the shady dealings of The Premier League - end of.

She’s got more in common with super rich American owners than she has with grassroots fans.
 
Legalamb777 said:
Personally I don’t like the sound of that;(
If city GENUINELY don’t know the outcome or how it’s going etc,then I suspect you mean by POSITIVE SIGNALS kept coming ie Puma deal,haaland extended contract,stadium expansion,big spending in January & summer transfer windows,the only thing we know FOR SURE is its taking quite a long time…which you think is a negative signal…now that’s a FACT,and taking into account you’re knowledgeable on these types of things……extremely worrying;(
Click to expand...

The thing is, nothing, absolutely nothing has happened to shake my belief in the outcome.

The facts of the case as we think we know them, in my view, have always led to the conclusion that the most serious charges will not be proven.

I am as sure as sure can be that that is the case.

I am slightly less sure that some of the lesser allegations won't be proven, purely because of a lack of information on some of them on which to base an opinion but, as I have said before, I am minded to believe Khaldoon when he says he can counter those allegations rather than the PL whose track record on Section W and Section X procedures is woeful.

I am a little less sure again on non-cooperation, but I still think there is a very good chance, for reasons I can explain again if anyone is interested, that those allegations will be effectively countered as well.

So, even in what I consider to be the worst possible case, if the club comes out of a four year investigation of its finances and a near three year disciplinary process with a slap on the wrist for some minor issues and, possibly, a fine for non-cooperation that would still be a good outcome for me. I defy any club to come out of such a process squeaky clean. To hell with what the press and other clubs' fans say.

As for how long it's taking, I get that a quick judgment would most likely indicate that one of the parties' cases, most probably the PL, was particularly weak or that some of the allegations had been dropped so it would be favourable to City, but I am struggling with the view that the process taking longer than "expected" is a negative sign for the club. No-one's expectations were based on anything, really. There is no precedent for this sort of case at the PL and so nothing to judge it against. Common wisdom is that in the courts this would take years. Personally, I would have expected the judgment sooner, but I am not going to get nervous because I initially underestimated how long it may take.

The "facts" of the case haven't changed no matter how long it takes. My predicted outcome hasn't changed either.
 
Last edited:
halfcenturyup said:
The thing is, nothing, absolutely nothing has happened to shake my belief in the outcome.

The facts of the case as we think we know them, in my view, have always led to the conclusion that the most serious charges will not be proven.

I am as sure as sure can be that that is the case.

I am slightly less sure that some of the lesser allegations won't be proven, purely because of a lack of information on some of them on which to base an opinion but, as I have said before, I am minded to believe Khaldoon when he says he can counter those allegations rather than the PL whose track record on Section W and Section X procedures is woeful.

I am a little less sure again on non-cooperation, but I still think there is a very good chance, for reasons I can explain again if anyone is interested, that those allegations will be effectively countered as well.

So, even in what I consider to be the worst possible case, if the club comes out of a four year investigation of its finances and a near three year disciplinary process with a slap on the wrist for some minor issues and, possibly, a fine for non-compliance that would still be a good outcome for me. I defy any club to come out of such a process squeaky clean. To hell with what the press and other clubs' fans say.

As for how long it's taking, I get that a quick judgment would most likely indicate that one of the parties' case, most probably the PL, was particularly weak or that some of the allegations had been dropped so it would be favourable to City, but I am struggling with the view that the process taking longer than "expected" is a negative sign for the club. No-one's expectations were based on anything, really. There is no precedent for this sort of case at the PL and so nothing to judge it against. Common wisdom is that in the courts this would take years. Personally, I would have expected the judgment sooner, but I am not going to get nervous because I initially underestimated how long it may take.

The "facts" of the case haven't changed no matter how long it takes. My predicted outcome hasn't changed either.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I think the writing up of the documents is a very difficult and sensitive process. There is a significant risk of ongoing legal actions from any of the parties, even sponsors, who may have been impacted by the case. There is also a huge political background which puts more pressure on the Judges to get everything right. Every word in the statement will be poured over by multiple legal teams. Remember that Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon(in his wealth fund role) are huge investors in the UK economy. A lot is at stake.
 
halfcenturyup said:
The thing is, nothing, absolutely nothing has happened to shake my belief in the outcome.

The facts of the case as we think we know them, in my view, have always led to the conclusion that the most serious charges will not be proven.

I am as sure as sure can be that that is the case.

I am slightly less sure that some of the lesser allegations won't be proven, purely because of a lack of information on some of them on which to base an opinion but, as I have said before, I am minded to believe Khaldoon when he says he can counter those allegations rather than the PL whose track record on Section W and Section X procedures is woeful.

I am a little less sure again on non-cooperation, but I still think there is a very good chance, for reasons I can explain again if anyone is interested, that those allegations will be effectively countered as well.

So, even in what I consider to be the worst possible case, if the club comes out of a four year investigation of its finances and a near three year disciplinary process with a slap on the wrist for some minor issues and, possibly, a fine for non-compliance that would still be a good outcome for me. I defy any club to come out of such a process squeaky clean. To hell with what the press and other clubs' fans say.

As for how long it's taking, I get that a quick judgment would most likely indicate that one of the parties' case, most probably the PL, was particularly weak or that some of the allegations had been dropped so it would be favourable to City, but I am struggling with the view that the process taking longer than "expected" is a negative sign for the club. No-one's expectations were based on anything, really. There is no precedent for this sort of case at the PL and so nothing to judge it against. Common wisdom is that in the courts this would take years. Personally, I would have expected the judgment sooner, but I am not going to get nervous because I initially underestimated how long it may take.

The "facts" of the case haven't changed no matter how long it takes. My predicted outcome hasn't changed either.
Click to expand...

Away from the main allegation of who paid for the Etihad and the Etisalat sponsorships, like you said will be hard to prove. Mancini’s wages and players image rights got bolted into this farce where uefa didn’t go near them. They could have with the players image rights as it wasn’t time barred, the main issue here being City essentially selling the image rights to themselves. In a world where hotels and womens football teams are being sold to bypass psr and waved through, how can the PL have an issue with the Fordham arrangement?

Then you have Mancini’s wages where no one from the PL has interviewed him on this issue. How do they prove the work he did as a consultant in the UAE wasn’t done? What sporting advantage was gained through this?

They can only look at non cooperation which the panel could take a different view on compared to the PL if they felt City provided the documents in a timely manner. And also the correct ones that didn’t over reach in sensitive info that the club felt it didn’t have to give.
 
Last edited:
Kazzydeyna said:
Hi mate, this is probably an unfair question to ask of you, and if you think it is then please don’t answer - I wouldn’t be offended in the least - but in your professional, experienced, opinion, knowing what we know and now having seen the timescales involved with no published decision, on a scale of 1-10 (with 1 being we are totally fucked and 10 being we are likely to be totally exonerated), what number would you give our chances as of this moment?

Again, if this is a stupid question, no problem, don’t feel the need to answer.
Click to expand...
7
 
cheekybids said:
Brady said it will be heavily redacted, what would be the reason for that?

Also she intimated about the costs which means they expect them to fall on the premier league.
Click to expand...
Sensitive or commercial information may be redacted. It will be more redacted the more City prevail probably. Still expect it to be generally readable.

She was pretty clear on costs - if the PL lose, they can expect to pay a large chunk of City's costs which is ultimately paid for by all the teams
 
slbsn said:
Sensitive or commercial information may be redacted. It will be more redacted the more City prevail probably. Still expect it to be generally readable.

She was pretty clear on costs - if the PL lose, they can expect to pay a large chunk of City's costs which is ultimately paid for by all the teams
Click to expand...

Thanks Stefan
 
There are three points which I think are worth emphasising on the issue of delay.

The first is that while we don’t know the identity of the panel it is highly likely that it contains at least two senior legal figures, quite possibly retired high court (or higher) judges. It is quite possible that they were already booked in to do other cases, commercial arbitrations for instance, so writing the decision up is something they have to fit around other their commitments. Which are unlikely to be simple cases themselves

the second thing is that the probability is that for the last 40 years these guys have been accustomed to taking August off. All of it. So chances are the panel isn’t hard at work crafting the 500 page decision we are all expecting. They’re actually sitting on the verandas of their houses in Tuscany and Provence watching the sun go down over a nice glass of Chianti/Bordeaux/whatevs

The third thing is that in a typical PL piece of shut-door-after-horse-has-bolted legislation they have stipulated that in the future appointees to disciplinary panels will be required to certify that they are able to give the appointment the necessary time to complete their work in a timely fashion. Which means the PL isn’t quite sure howling this one should have taken, but they think it’s too long and they are blaming the panel for having other things to do and taking August off.

I doubt delay in itself is either a positive or a negative. It is what it is. It just means we aren’t likely to get a decision in the next couple of weeks at least
 
Chris in London said:
There are three points which I think are worth emphasising on the issue of delay.

The first is that while we don’t know the identity of the panel it is highly likely that it contains at least two senior legal figures, quite possibly retired high court (or higher) judges. It is quite possible that they were already booked in to do other cases, commercial arbitrations for instance, so writing the decision up is something they have to fit around other their commitments. Which are unlikely to be simple cases themselves

the second thing is that the probability is that for the last 40 years these guys have been accustomed to taking August off. All of it. So chances are the panel isn’t hard at work crafting the 500 page decision we are all expecting. They’re actually sitting on the verandas of their houses in Tuscany and Provence watching the sun go down over a nice glass of Chianti/Bordeaux/whatevs

The third thing is that in a typical PL piece of shut-door-after-horse-has-bolted legislation they have stipulated that in the future appointees to disciplinary panels will be required to certify that they are able to give the appointment the necessary time to complete their work in a timely fashion. Which means the PL isn’t quite sure howling this one should have taken, but they think it’s too long and they are blaming the panel for having other things to do and taking August off.

I doubt delay in itself is either a positive or a negative. It is what it is. It just means we aren’t likely to get a decision in the next couple of weeks at least
Click to expand...
+ As the panel members are uncs, there could be health issues delaying the process.
 
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