Brilliant. First off, this is not mostly about FFP. It's about fraud. The Premiership is a club. It makes the rules. You sign up to them. You don't have to join. But if you do, you re-sign every year. Now go suck on that, and tell the 'property' with the hand up your back they can go suck on it too.
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Am I the only one think that this will not go anywhere. City will get a slap in the wrist at the end of the day.
The FA/PL is putting up a show that they're actually doing something. There were too many complaints from the public that City is blatantly cheating. Hence, they need to create an impression that they're "doing something".
With City's lawyers and toothless FA/PL, guess who will be the winner?
The FA/PL is putting up a show that they're actually doing something. There were too many complaints from the public that City is blatantly cheating. Hence, they need to create an impression that they're "doing something".
With City's lawyers and toothless FA/PL, guess who will be the winner?
Last edited:
What’s even funnier is he copy and pasted the exact same post he made in this thread on Monday
Neville is a tw@
MOS in June 2021 said:
I've understood that as an implicit threat to take matters to an ordinary court in order to challenge the currenty uncontested lawfulness of parts of the FA handbook. A case in precedence.
Can someone with legal background shed some light on this (see bolded bit of quote): Can owners of a club challenge the FA's rules' lawfulness in the first place? (And thus make a case against any penalties for breaching 'unlawful rules' whatsoever?)
Mirror in February 2023 said:
Second question for someone with legal background (see bolded bit in quote): Can arbitration nevertheless be had by going to court? (Basically challenging the rulebook's lawfulness from above as well as the installedsports arbitration system in total?)
Looking for a better understanding of things, and with kind regards
Whydah
what annoys me, is City in public comply, but have been working behind the scenes to bypass the rules.
Its blatantly dishonest and every other club has the right to feel dirty.
I htink the ownership at City feels its above the rules, as they come from a place where they literally are above the rules. When your the dicataor of a country you do not have to follow the rules and amending Finacial statements is probably something you do on a whim
The entire league should rise up and ask Khaldoon why he gets to cheat association football in the UK.
Its blatantly dishonest and every other club has the right to feel dirty.
I htink the ownership at City feels its above the rules, as they come from a place where they literally are above the rules. When your the dicataor of a country you do not have to follow the rules and amending Finacial statements is probably something you do on a whim
The entire league should rise up and ask Khaldoon why he gets to cheat association football in the UK.
Yup what's interesting is could expulsion means expelled forever. To the point that even winning the championship would see the pl not allow us back if they do choose.
You're not alone. I'm a bit old and cynical so I think there will be a lot of discussion but money talks doesn't it?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...cial-breaches-could-take-four-years-tfpb7wnhf
paywalled but Times saying case could take four years
paywalled but Times saying case could take four years
if they just wanted to show they are doing something, they could bring a few charges and let them off with a fine and dock a few points or something.. okay lads you've been a bit naughty but don't do it again
this amount of charges makes it difficult to believe there is any other intent than to take City down
Football has its rules... But they mustn't violate the law. Example: the Bosman sentence. For decades, football has predicted the cost even for players with expired contracts. But this was not legal. And the court has restored the law.
And FPF clearly violates the most basic laws of commercial law.
Last edited:
These sort of posts got really boring 2 days ago.
Reeks of people not really following the story at all.
I cannot read this, what is the justification?
This has nothing to do with FFP though?
What commercial laws are being violated here by the PL rules?
If you were City would you not want it decided sooner than that?
They’re in limbo now
It won't. There is clearly some serious pressure being applied on the EPL by outside influences - the only question at this point is who these influences are. Take your pick from:
*Threats from government (the white paper) frightened of looking like they have not lived up to their mandate regarding popular opinion from fans of each club that didn't break the rules
*Threats from super league breakaway members
*Threats from potential or even current investors in clubs to take them on in an even bigger lawsuit
*Threats from opposition leagues (La Liga etc) regarding fair play - that should never be a factor, nonetheless you don't want to make your partners in crime in UEFA and across any more belligerent than they need to be.
Also with their irrefutable evidence, you'd have thought they could just submit that and be done with it, clear their name and continue. Yet, they will delay it as long as they can and drag it out as long as they can. Wouldn't have thought a party with nothing to hide would want that...
You can't stop a property from spending its money on its company. This is FFP. And is not legal.
That wont happen. The cost of litigation will far offset the revenue lost from placing in the league. A lawsuit pertaining to relegation wont go anywhere for the same reason. We are talking a legal battle that will span years, and the legal fees will very likely not be recovered. You would also need to be able to prove in court that the FFP trickery directly impacted a league placement, which will be incredibly hard to begin with, even if Man C is found guiltty by a tribunal. Its one thing to be able to say "well yeah it did, its obvious". Its different entirely to make the argument citing the laws of the land. A aggrieved party will have to convince the court that the accused party have, on the balance of probabilities, caused financial damage. This applies to loss of earings in all competitions.
That Man City cant appeal a verdict that quite a few posters say is incorrect, they can appeal it, to FA, who in turn will have to set up a new independent tribunal to reivew the first process. At that point, this process will be drawn out for a long time.
It if genuinely better for everyone if they reach a settlement that carries a transfer ban, point deduction, and a big fine. A settlement that Manchester City will actually accept to be able to put this behind everyone, instead of spending years and a small fortune fighting for a uncertain outcome.
This whole fallout is way too complicated to accurately describe in a short post, but the summary is that a compensation for loss of earning litigation is extremely unlikely to take place due to the complexity, duration and lack of precedent.
They’re not stopping City. They’re just saying you suffer consequences if you do.
That’s how sport works. If you get that deep then transfer windows aren’t legal. Bad tackle should see you in court for GBH etc.
That's not the issue. The issue is that they signed up to the conditions of membership of the Premier League and then allegedly breached those terms.
They are free to spend as much money as they want, except if they want to participate in a league then they need to abide by the rules of the league. If they don't, the league has every right to expel them and they can continue to spend all their money upon expulsion.
The Times are quoting Nick De Marco KC (he's one of the most eminent Sports Law barristers in the UK). He gave a four year estimate yesterday on Twitter:
The more I think about this the angrier I become.
So many people are writing it off as a nothing story, but the truth is cheated many clubs, players, management, and fans out of historical moments. No, they've stolen them.
Put the money the clubs lost to one side. It's about the fan experience and making memories. All stolen. It's a disgrace and they should be punished with relegation to the bottom of the football league. Every trophy they've won since 2008 should be wiped from the records.
What's worse is the clubs defeanding what they did. They've cheated and they think they can buy their way out.
If they do then the integrity of the Premier League is finished.
So many people are writing it off as a nothing story, but the truth is cheated many clubs, players, management, and fans out of historical moments. No, they've stolen them.
Put the money the clubs lost to one side. It's about the fan experience and making memories. All stolen. It's a disgrace and they should be punished with relegation to the bottom of the football league. Every trophy they've won since 2008 should be wiped from the records.
What's worse is the clubs defeanding what they did. They've cheated and they think they can buy their way out.
If they do then the integrity of the Premier League is finished.
Even pre-Bosman football had its rules. And the clubs had signed up for these rules. But they weren't legal. And in fact the court canceled them. It is the same as the FPF: it is clearly illegal and if City (or another club) goes to court it will be canceled. Sport can write its rules, but these rules must remain within the law.
.....
Sorry but I can't answer anymore. I have reached the maximum number of 3 messages per day. (Hope to be promoted soon!).
Last edited:
This is rubbish, a sports league can apply its own rules. Legally you can't stop someone moving employers a dozen times a year, but in the PL you can't play for more than 2 clubs in a year. Legally you can't stop someone employing 100 players, but you can't register that many. Legally you can't stop anyone moving employers, but the PL can require that one club has to sign the registration of a player to another and that can be for a fee.
I wonder what Pep is thinking. If he stays and they're acquitted he comes out of this OK but if he stays and they're found guilty it's not hyperbole to say this would tarnish his entire career. If he considers there's a decent chance of any of the charges being upheld does he think about jumping ship?
No, they know they're guilty but in four years time much of the bluster and noise around this will have died down. The PL will be able to offer them an easy way out through a fine (bribe) and it'll all be forgotten.
So the premier league will just keep having a team compete for the title (and potentially win it) for the next 4 years that is under investigation. Really makes the league hollow as feck
Maybe the Premier League should suspend City until the case is concluded. Unlikely and probably not possible but would send a very strong message that it's in everyone's best interests to resolve it as soon as possible.
The problem with it taking years is that by the time they've dealt with the period in question, they may then have to start a new investigation for the years after until the verdict.
The problem with it taking years is that by the time they've dealt with the period in question, they may then have to start a new investigation for the years after until the verdict.
Absolute pish.
someone should let city know this
He is thinking about going to PSG before it falls on them too.
That would be too harsh and unfair on the fans.
As a fan I agree but it's an interesting word choice.
Taking that argument to an even more bizarre level, players can sue the PL for not allowing them to score goals with their hands. Or being yellow carded for simply taking their shirt off, within decency. Or choosing not to wear shin pads at all (freedom/rights/etc). All of these things are rules of an organisation but can be challenged (easily probably) in a court of law. Where do you stop?
On the other side, do they just expel City and wait for court proceedings to take place? What happens if City gets aquitted for even some of those charges? What do you want the league to do outside of take action that will cost the club well over £5bn in lost revenue and loss of player sale/development and destruction of the clubs brand value assuming a 4 year estimated court proceedings estimate.
This is a complex issue without a satisfying immediate resolution for anyone
Why would this disappear in four years time? Are City going to quietly move towards irrelevance in that time? This isn’t big news because it’s a surprise, it’s big news because people have expected it and it’s been proven true. People want a a punishment and will be no less hungry for that punishment in four years, especially if they continue their ways.
Libertarian bollocks.