PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

South Stand Balti said:
Just read Stefan's article. In short, taking 19 months may be seen as too long to get a safe judgement. The reason it took so long is almost certainly (according to the article) so they can get any guilty decisions worded so correctly that the 19 months won't actually become an issue. That about right? Doesn't that simply suggest we have been found guilty on some points and, presumably, some significant ones?
Click to expand...

No, that we have been found innocent of all charges and that certain 3rd parties have pressurised the EPL and that the charges are made knowing there was no foundation and done so purely to advance their own position.
 
Ban-jani said:
Nothing has previously leaked with regards to any of the cases vs The PL from City’s end. It’s another reason I am confident, because the Premier League cannot help themselves leaking to their cronies (Ziegler) being the main one, and if City were at serious risk of losing, we’d likely know via these leaks by now.

I don’t think PB is a bullshitter, he found out about the UEFA/CAS decision just after the club did, before the decision was announced, and told us all we’d won. So he has form for ITK credentials.

Maresca agreeing to join and Pep taking another CFG role, surely means those two individuals are confident.

Let’s see, but I think the news is coming before the World Cup. Just got a feeling, and it’s going to be a great week when it does.
Click to expand...
I've thought for ages that the lack of a leak is a positive sign for city. As you say, the PL / Masters could not help themselves.
 
Ric said:
Interesting read from Stefan here.

Click to expand...

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Stefan's been on a hiding to nothing because he said the verdict was imminent. I accept that by saying that he raised expectations and perhaps saying it is due or something similar would have helped. That said, he has been continually a reasonable and sane voice on a subject that has been presented very differently by the media. As we know, the media see facts as less important and instead use wild speculation to get the baying mob's attention. Personally, without Stefan's input on 115 I would know a lot less and certainly would be less confident about our chances based on mostly biased reports from the media.

This is another very clear piece from Stefan that provides very helpful legal background. I doubt the mainstream media would have produced anything quite so insightful.

Come on City!
 
Bez said:
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Stefan's been on a hiding to nothing because he said the verdict was imminent. I accept that by saying that he raised expectations and perhaps saying it is due or something similar would have helped. That said, he has been continually a reasonable and sane voice on a subject that has been presented very differently by the media. As we know, the media see facts as less important and instead use wild speculation to get the baying mob's attention. Personally, without Stefan's input on 115 I would know a lot less and certainly would be less confident about our chances based on mostly biased reports from the media.

This is another very clear piece from Stefan that provides very helpful legal background. I doubt the mainstream media would have produced anything quite so insightful.

Come on City!
Click to expand...
At least he didn't again say it's imminent then...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bez
VOOMER said:
Pep is going CFG, he will be setting up the coaching blueprint for all the CFG teams. Its doesn't say that, but I'm putting my own self serving slant on the story
Click to expand...
Right, and what about the 115? Appreciate that’s a soft signal, but I thought you’d have more than that with regards to the case.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I'm solid in my belief, based on information from respected sources, that the outcome was decided (and informally known by the parties) within 3 months of the end of the hearing. I also believe the outcome wasn't great for one of those parties, which has been a major contributory factor in the inordinate delay. (Hint: it wasn't City).
Click to expand...
I struggle with the notion that the panel could have decided after 3 months but both parties to the proceedings have then taken over 14 months to reach some sort of settlement. Under those circumstances I would expect to hear something not just radio silence. It also appears to the world that the delay is caused by the Independent Panel.

From a City point of view they wont want to be going into a new season with a new manager with this still unresolved. There could also be a 'I was only interested in going to City to play for Pep. That lure has now gone with today's announcement.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
For those of us without X what is the gist of it?
Click to expand...
Asked AI to summarise in 10 bullet points:

  • The article argues that the expected 19-month delay in the Manchester City Independent Commission (IC) verdict could undermine the reliability of the judgment itself.
  • English courts generally expect judgments within about 3 months because long delays weaken confidence and memory of evidence.
  • Several major legal cases (especially Bilta, Goose, and Bond) show that very delayed judgments can be overturned or retried.
  • In Bilta, a 19-month delay after a fraud trial led to a retrial because the court could no longer assume the judge fully remembered and connected all the evidence.
  • The key legal issue is not just “did the judge forget facts?” but whether the reasoning stayed coherent across a huge, complex case.
  • The article says Manchester City’s case is especially vulnerable because it involves 115 charges, multiple seasons, changing regulations, and allegations tied to honesty and credibility.
  • A major risk is “compartmentalisation”: findings on one issue may not properly connect with findings on another after such a long drafting process.
  • The IC is slightly different from a normal court because it is a 3-member arbitration panel, which may reduce (but not remove) the risks caused by delay.
  • If City lose, their lawyers are expected to scrutinise the judgment for missing evidence, ignored documents, inconsistencies, or weak credibility findings using the Bilta precedent.
  • The article concludes that the IC can protect its ruling only by producing an extremely detailed, internally consistent judgment that clearly shows every charge and piece of evidence was carefully connected and considered together.
Click to expand...
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I'm speculating wildly here but I've said before that I've been told the PL didn't come out of it well.

Let's say that the outcome was so bad for the PL that there's a possibility of damaging legal action against them over their conduct and of some of their member clubs. Obviously they wouldn't want that, so maybe the delay is due to the two parties trying to reach some sort of settlement outside of the 3-man tribunal. So not about the outcome itself, which was decided soon after the end of the hearing in line with PL rules, but about the potential
consequences of the outcome.

As I say, that's pure speculation but I think it's slightly more feasible than one of the panel members not being able to get a new supply of the ink cartridges they were using to write up their verdict.



Well the proceeding are meant to be in strict confidence but maybe, as I speculated above, there's a possibility of legal action. Leaks could be very damaging, or even fatal, in that scenario.
Click to expand...
I think City getting ref'd the same way as red cartel clubs is a very fair settlement. Oh and they still pay our legal fees and damages which will be a nice downpayment for Elliot Anderson.
 
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