The Super League | FA + PL: New Charter & Fines | UEFA: Settlement

[slbsn]

Congratulations on having the piece published.

I know you're not responsible for the picture taglines but I guess the following re. 'new emails' is bollocks (unless I've missed something)?

Pep Guardiola's squad is alleged to have been built outside of FFP, with new emails leaked

I assume its referring to the ones in last weeks paper which were leaked a year ago.

 

[waspish]

Here’s a piece I wrote for Mail on Sunday.

STEFAN BORSON: Premier League in unenviable spot in City legal battles

Manchester City's seemingly never-ending battle with the football authorities over matters of accounting are so esoteric you wonder who's interested.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Don’t usually click on the mail articles but seeing it’s you..

 

[CC1]

Here’s a piece I wrote for Mail on Sunday.

STEFAN BORSON: Premier League in unenviable spot in City legal battles

Manchester City's seemingly never-ending battle with the football authorities over matters of accounting are so esoteric you wonder who's interested.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It’s a brilliant & knowledgeable article. But as a City fan it seems a gloomy prospect & it didn’t offer much hope of City being the innocent party. It made me think the PL have a case rather than they’ve taken leaked emails out of context. Are our sponsors valid & is the time bar applicable? If so why are the PL pursuing this so vigorously- or is it a lot of hot air??

I guess we’d like some reassurance on the whole matter but nobody seems able to offer any.

or am I missing the point? :(

 

[waspish]

It’s a brilliant & knowledgeable article. But as a City fan it seems a gloomy prospect & it didn’t offer much hope of City being the innocent party. It made me think the PL have a case rather than they’ve taken leaked emails out of context. Are our sponsors valid & is the time bar applicable? If so why are the PL pursuing this so vigorously- or is it a lot of hot air??

I guess we’d like some reassurance on the whole matter but nobody seems able to offer any.

or am I missing the point? :(

It’s the other clubs that putting the pressure on to pursue it like it said in the article!

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

I read the that article and came away with the distinct impression that there is a serious case to answer with Steffan’s quotes backing Harris’ claims. However, that may have just been the way the article/quotes were framed or the specific questions asked.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

English Courts will have the final say but not on the decision of the arbitration itself (unless there is some manifest error). English Courts can deal with disputes but not as an appeal to the arbitration itself ordinarily.

What would the Courts look at then, if not the decision of the arbitration itself? Given the sheer size of the financial implications involved, surely it would be preposterous for our very future to be decided by a non-judicial body such as the Premier League, without some properly qualified appeal mechanism in place. As you said yourself, the PL's disciplinary processes are geared towards rescinding red cards, not multi-million dollar accountancy matters

 

[slbsn]

I read the that article and came away with the distinct impression that there is a serious case to answer with Steffan’s quotes backing Harris’ claims. However, that may have just been the way the article/quotes were framed or the specific questions asked.

The impression I wanted to present whilst getting through the editorial process is that the allegations are serious, such that its hard to imagine how the PL could prosecute them. That process is made even harder because City have clean accounts and a CAS verdict with important findings. But the PL is in a tricky situation as the other clubs (and certain media) want blood. I don't see how the PL could hope to pursue such serious allegations so is more likely they will try and find something rather than just dropping it...but we are all guessing.

 

[Centurions]

It’s a brilliant & knowledgeable article. But as a City fan it seems a gloomy prospect & it didn’t offer much hope of City being the innocent party. It made me think the PL have a case rather than they’ve taken leaked emails out of context. Are our sponsors valid & is the time bar applicable? If so why are the PL pursuing this so vigorously- or is it a lot of hot air??

I guess we’d like some reassurance on the whole matter but nobody seems able to offer any.

or am I missing the point? :(

Damned if I can see how that was your takeaway there.

 

[Len Rum]

The impression I wanted to present whilst getting through the editorial process is that the allegations are serious, such that its hard to imagine how the PL could prosecute them. That process is made even harder because City have clean accounts and a CAS verdict with important findings. But the PL is in a tricky situation as the other clubs (and certain media) want blood. I don't see how the PL could hope to pursue such serious allegations so is more likely they will try and find something rather than just dropping it...but we are all guessing.

Just to clarify the allegations you refer to are ( as stated in the article) as you perceive them?

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

The impression I wanted to present whilst getting through the editorial process is that the allegations are serious, such that its hard to imagine how the PL could prosecute them. That process is made even harder because City have clean accounts and a CAS verdict with important findings. But the PL is in a tricky situation as the other clubs (and certain media) want blood. I don't see how the PL could hope to pursue such serious allegations so is more likely they will try and find something rather than just dropping it...but we are all guessing.

Just read your article and it’s clear that Harris has used his piece to continue to insinuate that there may still be a huge outcome. Your article seems quite clear and as we all know what CAS made of the previous claim then it‘s hard to see what further evidence could be drawn by the PL, especially as their rules came in much later and to a lesser degree.

The question I asked myself on the 2 articles was, if you had given a factual and experienced view, why was another article by Harris needed? His seemed to be a puff piece, manipulating your thoughts to support his views.

My view was that the PL wanted to keep this hush-hush as they wanted to drop the case quietly if the CAS case went in our favour. I bet they’re fuming now and looking for a way out that City won’t accept.