City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with 130 FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th Sep 2024 | Concluded 9th Dec 2024 - Awaiting outcome

Pexbo said:
Would love to hear your logic on this one. How does no leaks indicate anything in any way shape or form?
Click to expand...

Generally, you would hear that there are penalties coming, all the leaks leading up to the deadline was about City going to win.

Judas said:
Why have the PL bothered if they only care about money? They must care about wrong to a certain degree hence this whole thing happening?
Click to expand...

If they bring the case to City... like the UEFA one, get a big penalty fee of 10m Euros. Take Everton and Forest for example, it was done within a season, for breaches later than City.

City's breaches date back to 2012... it will just be a slap on the wrist with a fine. Knowing City, they will probably give off book payments to the execs to shut them up.
 
duffer said:
Being charged with something isn't proof you did it, be it murder, fraud or failing to cooperate.
Click to expand...

The deciding body are the ones who are supposed to receive the documents. They would know if they received the documents City were required to send.

This isn’t rocket science.
 
Eriku said:
The deciding body are the ones who are supposed to receive the documents. They would know if they received the documents City were required to send.

This isn’t rocket science.
Click to expand...
They wouldn't be having a hearing if it was that simple.

It's not rocket science, it's way more complicated.
 
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
 
duffer said:
They wouldn't be having a hearing if it was that simple.

It's not rocket science, it's way more complicated.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the complicated part isn’t the open and shut aspect of whether City opened their books for them. I get valuing the principles of a fair trial but this is just being argumentative for the sake of it.

They also have priors on this:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53571659.amp

Manchester City showed a "blatant disregard" to Uefa's investigation into potential Financial Fair Play (FFP) breaches, says the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas), even though it found "no conclusive evidence that they disguised funding from their owner as sponsorship".
Click to expand...
 
I’m confused as well. How can the premier league bring charges against Man City, then put their judges wig on and have the final say? If they’re sure they’ve done it then who are they trying to prove it to at this hearing? Unless it is an independent panel and not the PL?
 
2 man midfield said:
I’m confused as well. How can the premier league bring charges against Man City, then put their judges wig on and have the final say? If they’re sure they’ve done it then who are they trying to prove it to at this hearing? Unless it is an independent panel and not the PL?
Click to expand...
It's an independent commission.
 
Nogbadthebad said:
They will be.

What would be damaging is to give the titles to someone else. They will strike this period of city from the record books.

I don't really see how it continues with the same people in charge to be honest, they have proven themselves unfit as owners, even by the league's vague definition.

They forced abramovich to sell, the only real way out of the mess is to do the same here.
Click to expand...
It wasn't the PL that forced the sale, the Government sanctioned Abramovich, that basically meant Chelsea couldn't operate with him owning the club, he either had to sell it of the club folded
 
Eriku said:
Pretty sure the complicated part isn’t the open and shut aspect of whether City opened their books for them. I get valuing the principles of a fair trial but this is just being argumentative for the sake of it.

They also have priors on this:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53571659.amp
Click to expand...

Exactly, there is clear evidence of prior, which is why I feel they will get away with a financial slap on the wrist.

UEFA reports were claiming City could be banned from CL for 2 seasons... instead they ended up paying a 10m fine.
If someone is innocent, they dont pay the fine.

It will be the same with the PL, a financial fine that suits the PL and City dont mind paying millions to make sure the case goes away.

City also have the benefit of having government influence as it is state owned, to twist the arms of the PL.
 
Jaffa Cakes II said:
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure.

City getting turfed out for being cheats might not have a big impact on TV rights. They really don't have a big enough fan global fan base who might actually purchase these TV subscriptions for it to matter.

It could be the opposite, more people might be happy to see them gone and could be more likely to take an active interest in the league again.
 
Correct me if i am wrong; So, unlike all other leagues in Europe where FA is uber overlord and runs everything from league one to league 10, in PL clubs are in charge? So clubs decide about rules.
BUT, leagues bellow PL are run by another organisation? So if PL wants to expel City they can only kick them out by voting and then City must ask EFL (who is again another organisation not related to FA) to accept them in one of their leagues?

Referee organisation is another organisation too. So, wtf FA does?
 
Last edited:
Have they made the entire list of 115 charges public? Lots of pages here to look through, plus fruitless searching on google hasn't helped me find this.
 
Red Shorts said:
Have they made the entire list of 115 charges public? Lots of pages here to look through, plus fruitless searching on google hasn't helped me find this.
Click to expand...
Yep all 130 of them
 
romufc said:
UEFA reports were claiming City could be banned from CL for 2 seasons... instead they ended up paying a 10m fine.
If someone is innocent, they dont pay the fine.
Click to expand...

You cant compare the UEFA case to this one as 2 completely different cases processed through 2 different systems, they got away with most of the offences in the UEFA case and thus then ban because the evidence that alledgedly proved those offences was inadmissable due to being deemed as time barred by 2 of the 3 on the panel.

The Premier League case doesnt have any time barring rules therefore all the evidence should be admissible
 
Andycoleno9 said:
Correct me if i am wrong; So, unlike all other leagues in Europe where FA is uber overlord and runs everything from league one to league 10, in PL clubs are in charge? So clubs decide about rules.
BUT, leagues bellow PL are run by another organisation? So if PL wants to expel City they can only kick them out by voting and then City must ask EFL (who is again another organisation not related to FA) to accept them in one of their leagues?

Referee organisation is another organisation too. So, wtf FA does?
Click to expand...

Yeah, PL cannot relegate City, they can expel them if they want to remove them from the league.

They could give them 100 point deduction that guarantees relegation. But that's the only way they could be directly relegated to the Championship.

If the PL expels City, they would have to apply to the football league for membership, the football league would then decide what level of the pyramid they can start at. I think that can be anywhere down to the 7th, 8th or 9th tier, which is the Northern Premier league or Isthmian League or something like that.
 
Red Shorts said:
Have they made the entire list of 115 charges public? Lots of pages here to look through, plus fruitless searching on google hasn't helped me find this.
Click to expand...
Here you go…

1. In respect of each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those seasons that required provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs, namely:

(a) for Season 2009/10, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72, C.75 (amended to C.79 from 10 September 2009 for the remainder of Season 2009/10) and C.80;

(b) for Season 2010/11, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;

(c) for Season 2011/12, Premier League Rules B.13, E.3, 4, E.11 and E.12;

(d) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules 16, E.3, E.4, E.11 and E.12;

(e) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rules 15, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.49;

(f) for Season 2014/15, Premier League Rules 16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;

(g) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules 16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;

(h) for Season 2016/17, Premier League Rules16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51; and

(i) for Season 2017/18, Premier League Rules B.16, 3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51.

2. In respect of:

(a) each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2012/13 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager, namely:

(1) for Seasons 2009/10 to 2011/12 inclusive, Premier League Rules Q.7 and Q.8; and

(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules P.7 and P.8; and

(b) each of Seasons 2010/11 to 2015/16 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of player remuneration in its relevant contracts with its players, namely:

(1) for Seasons 2010/11 and 2011/12, Premier League Rules K.12 and K.20;

(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.20;

(3) for Seasons 2013/14 and 2014/15, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.19; and

(4) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules T.13 and T.20.

3. In respect of each of Seasons 2013/14 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, namely:

(a) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rule B.14.6; and

(b) for Seasons 2014/15 to 2017/18 inclusive, Premier League Rule B.15.6.

4. In respect of each of the Seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons on Profitability and Sustainability, namely:

(a) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules E.52 to E.60; and

(b) for Seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18, Premier League Rules E.53 to E.60.

5. In respect of the period from December 2018 to date, the Premier League Rules applicable in the relevant Seasons requiring a member club to cooperate with, and assist, the Premier League in its investigations, including by providing documents and information to the Premier League in the utmost good faith, namely:

(a) for Season 2018/19, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;

(b) for Season 2019/20, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;

(c) for Season 2020/21, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;

(d) for Season 2021/22, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.15 and W.16; and

(e) for Season 2022/23, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.15 and W.16.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
You cant compare the UEFA case to this one as 2 completely different cases processed through 2 different systems, they got away with most of the offences in the UEFA case and thus then ban because the evidence that alledgedly proved those offences was inadmissable due to being deemed as time barred by 2 of the 3 on the panel.

The Premier League case doesnt have any time barring rules therefore all the evidence should be admissible
Click to expand...

We cant compare the two cases but it shows what can happen. Why did UEFA bring a case to City knowing its going to be time barred?

City still paid a fine, paying a fine is admission to guilt. However; they probably agreed on a fine because it suits both parties, UEFA get money, City get away with it.

PL are money grabbing too, they don't care about fair play, look at all the loopholes that Chelsea keep getting away with.

City obviously know more than us, in the last 2 weeks, Pep has signed a new deal and now the case is closed, verdict outstanding. All different signs that City will not be facing a ban or major point deduction.

They will get a 20 point deduction or something, just enough so they look like they are doing something but not enough to hamper them going forward
 
romufc said:
We cant compare the two cases but it shows what can happen. Why did UEFA bring a case to City knowing its going to be time barred?
Click to expand...

As I understand it UEFA did not believe the evidence was time barred however CAS decided that the timebarring window UEFA had used was incorrect and that under the correct timebarring window a lot of the evidence should be time barred.

romufc said:
City still paid a fine, paying a fine is admission to guilt. However; they probably agreed on a fine because it suits both parties, UEFA get money, City get away with it.

PL are money grabbing too, they don't care about fair play, look at all the loopholes that Chelsea keep getting away with.

City obviously know more than us, in the last 2 weeks, Pep has signed a new deal and now the case is closed, verdict outstanding. All different signs that City will not be facing a ban or major point deduction.

They will get a 20 point deduction or something, just enough so they look like they are doing something but not enough to hamper them going forward
Click to expand...

Its important to remember that if City are found guilty the punishment will be decided by the panel which is completely independent from the FA and Premier League
 
romufc said:
Generally, you would hear that there are penalties coming, all the leaks leading up to the deadline was about City going to win.
Click to expand...
If City got off without much penalty, given City's bad form, potentially wanting to strengthen in Jan etc surely City would ensure it got leaked?
 
MaMa given red said:
The Premier League had launched an investigation. In December 2018 City decided not to co-operate any further.

This is a matter of fact unless you think the Premier League are lying and City did co-operate?



This is the saddest part for me.

They have ruined the Premier League much how PSG have ruined the French League.

There is no punishment heavy enough for them. If I were Newcastles owners I would be looking at this and thinking that I'd just completely ignore any PSR restrictions and spend as much money as possible and deal with the consequences at a later date. The funny thing is, If Newcastle did this and started to blow City out the water, they'd be the first ones to start crying about it!

@duffer

Out of posts, It's been widely reported that City have refused to co-operate since 2018.

"They aren't necessarily lying. They might have a different interpretation on what "co-operation" means in this context"

What else could it mean?

You either co-operate or you don't, it's pretty straight forward?

Part of the reason that City stopped co-operating is that they knew it would mean that things take a lot longer and they can keep kicking the can down the road.

As I've said before, innocent parties don't act this way! If you have nothing to hide you don't run!
Click to expand...
I’ve said in this thread before that failure to submit required docs and info on request or when they are due should mean an automatic points deduction.
This MUST be built into PL rules and from someone who works in a compliance heavy industry it’s mind boggling that this isn’t already in the rule book.
Despite PL being a multi billion pound industry the governance and framework around it is comical.
 
duffer said:
Maybe they co-operated. I don't know and neither do you.
Click to expand...
Its pretty blatant though.

A club doesn't organically grow from zero to hero in such a short space of time, with your main sponsors having links to your owners, countless emails showing they were trying to subvert the rules, not cooperating (with quotes from their owners stating as much) and evidence of big contracts going to ex managers (Mancini) in UAE roles running concurrently to his City job.

There is so much evidence. The only possibility is getting off on a technicality, similar to the CAS ruling.
 
Jaffa Cakes II said:
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
Click to expand...
Nah, Liverpool, Arsenal, United, Chelsea generate more intrest. PL will be fine without them
 
The Purley King said:
I’ve said in this thread before that failure to submit required docs and info on request or when they are due should mean an automatic points deduction.
This MUST be built into PL rules and from someone who works in a compliance heavy industry it’s mind boggling that this isn’t already in the rule book.
Despite PL being a multi billion pound industry the governance and framework around it is comical.
Click to expand...

It should be an automattic expulsion from the League as refusing to provide yhe relevant documentation on request is a breech of the agreement clubs agree to when they sign up.
 
Jaffa Cakes II said:
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
Click to expand...
Fecking jewel. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
The Purley King said:
failure to submit required docs and info on request or when they are due should mean an automatic points deduction.
This MUST be built into PL rules and from someone who works in a compliance heavy industry it’s mind boggling that this isn’t already in the rule book.
Despite PL being a multi billion pound industry the governance and framework around it is comical.
Click to expand...
Almost like some sort of Independent Regulation for Football ?
 
Eriku said:
:lol:

Yeah, City have a long way to go before they have the same kind of following as Arsenal, Chelsea, United, Liverpool, etc. Pretty sure the marker value of the EPL product won’t plummet.
Click to expand...
Closer to Paul Jewell than an actual jewel.
 
Herschel Krustofsky said:
Almost like some sort of Independent Regulation for Football ?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily that but just introduce some common sense rules. Rules that people running PL should know about already if they have any experience in any other industry.
This sort of shit really gives the government a good case for introducing a regulator which nobody wants but will be inevitable if the current shit show continues.
 
Jaffa Cakes II said:
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
Click to expand...
City in their current form are a stain on the game. Not a jewel.

It's sad what their owners have done, to a once genuine club with integrity.
 
Jaffa Cakes II said:
You may all be right and City are in for the chop on a grand scale. What makes me pause for thought is that, whether you or I like it or not (I don't), City are one of the jewels in the Premier League crown. Yep, those jewels may well be blood diamonds so as to speak, but even so... The Premier League is a supreme money making machine, those rights go for gazillions. I am sure the PL is staffed exclusively by virtuous men whose only thought and purpose is the pursuit of justice (erm....) but will they willingly risk tarnishing the brand, risk losing some of those gazillions ? I have my doubts.
Click to expand...
:lol:

No, they aren't. They were a mid table club until just a few years ago. No one will miss them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.