Judgement day will come. Only this time John Connor can't save them
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th September 2024
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
I don't think anything will happen they'll just fine them and hiding the dust under the carpet
City is biggest player in PL removing them it's like kicking themselves in their nuts
I mean nonelse is as stupid as Serie A.
Neither Spain or France or UK
How can they now there is a clear precedent ?
there is always a way.
They will prolly give a massive fine to be shared by clubs
and City will pay since for them money means nothing
Swedish Rumble update on delays that City have used to try and stall/stop case progressing. Years of expensive appeals that have all been kicked out .. clearly trying to drown the case in appeals, cost and time. Which they have an endless supply of.
I know we like to say innocent until proven guilty (though interestingly this tweet says that isn’t the case here… City have to prove innocent) but why not at least try and engage/prove claims incorrect if so sure they’re innocent? As they keep claiming.
I know we like to say innocent until proven guilty (though interestingly this tweet says that isn’t the case here… City have to prove innocent) but why not at least try and engage/prove claims incorrect if so sure they’re innocent? As they keep claiming.
I would be cautious with analyses such as these. Taken charitably, a lot of nuance may be lost in translation when trying to relay points for broad public consumption via twitter. Balance of probabilities is not the lowest possible standard; there are others that are lower like "mere suspicion" and "reasonable grounds to believe". Though some unique particularities may apply in this case, here is a generalized relevant excerpt from the Global Arbitration Review regarding the burden shifting to which he may be alluding:
Prima facie evidence is proof that is sufficient, if not contradicted, to establish a party’s contention. To be considered prima facie proof of a contention, the evidence must not be open to several equally plausible and opposing interpretations. In international arbitration, it is generally considered that evidence that establishes a contention to a level of prima facie certainty is sufficient to shift the burden of proof from one party to the other. This burden shifting concerns the risk of non-production of evidence; it does not displace the procedural duty on both parties throughout the arbitration to substantiate their allegations. If a party, be it claimant or respondent, fails to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate its position, it risks not satisfying the tribunal of its case. Alternatively, the burden of proof may be shifted because of either a presumption found in the applicable law, contractual rules or standards, or the presentation of affirmative defences.
The risk of non-production may also refer to the onus of proof, which falls on the party that faces a preponderance of evidence against it, or on the party otherwise needing to convince an adjudicator at any point in the arbitration. In a practical sense, it is immaterial whether the party with that onus has the burden of proof or not. At the point when a party is called on to produce evidence, the opposite party has better evidence, and the party with the onus of proof will lose if it does not produce adequate evidence on rebuttal to the contrary. Whether the standard of proof has been satisfied thus depends on the evidence presented by both parties.
The risk of non-production may also refer to the onus of proof, which falls on the party that faces a preponderance of evidence against it, or on the party otherwise needing to convince an adjudicator at any point in the arbitration. In a practical sense, it is immaterial whether the party with that onus has the burden of proof or not. At the point when a party is called on to produce evidence, the opposite party has better evidence, and the party with the onus of proof will lose if it does not produce adequate evidence on rebuttal to the contrary. Whether the standard of proof has been satisfied thus depends on the evidence presented by both parties.
If City were to bring forth countervailing or exculpatory evidence, its more than likely going to be within the confines of the proceedings rather than in a public pissing match. The PL is still also going to need to substantiate its case and it will take a lot more than suggestive emails.
Is this a parody of city's lawyers?
. Yes, minus the wads of cash and plum appointments.
Okay good. I struggle to tell who's serious sometimes
Okay good. I struggle to tell who's serious sometimes
The first post was serious, the second was not. That tweet gives the impression that the bar for the PL to win is much lower than it actually is. I'm not sure how that helps anyone.
I wonder when the case is concluded and City are inevitably found guilty of multiple charges, in order to prevent any appeal, the League might offer them to chance to keep their titles and accept massive points deduction, relegation and the possibility of not being accepted into the Football League.
Alternatively they could offer them the chance to avoid major punishment but have their titles and cup wins voided.
If you lacked morals and were so bitter you could be a YouTube eating challenge, what would you choose?
Alternatively they could offer them the chance to avoid major punishment but have their titles and cup wins voided.
If you lacked morals and were so bitter you could be a YouTube eating challenge, what would you choose?
To late. We need decision now. We need to know if all ManCity trophies are going to be taken away or not. We need to know if ManCity will be playing in some local division or not?
Last edited:
That was hilarious. Even if a referee turned out to have taken actual bribes by City's opponents, they still would be hypocrites to complain.
Totally the behavour of a club with nothing to hide that just wants all this unpleasantness behind it.
So they can carry on as if nothing has happened, and we have to listen the media telling us how great they are, whilst they perhaps win another treble or two before this even gets close to a resolution all because City are refusing to corporate? it's terrible look for the Premiership.
I don't quite understand why they can't work through some of the more obvious charges now and work from there. If they are proven guilty and are then rolling all 115 charges up into one punishment then nothing short of oblivion for them will be enough.
I don't quite understand why they can't work through some of the more obvious charges now and work from there. If they are proven guilty and are then rolling all 115 charges up into one punishment then nothing short of oblivion for them will be enough.
That image will have to be used once they are found guilty and punished.
More charges for City
Meanwhile the Treble Trophies are on tour in the States. The Empire State Building was lit in sky blue in honour of City winning the Treble. The biggest city in the world friggin turning blue for them. I could see the blue lights from my house. They’re not gonna get charged for anything because they apparently are too big to fail which is bullshit.
having seen everton’s reaction to their punishment, it’s probably best for us all if
we just ignore it all and hope it goes away.
What?
I thought it was in support of Israel.
I feel slightly better, but still, what the feck? Did our treble get celebrated in '99?
Also, this is what we get for having shit teams in the NY area.
They have the treble trophies on tour for the States. Trust me 99% of New Yorkers had no idea. It gets lit up all the time for a ton of reasons and City winning a treble was probably only known to the hundred or so supporters living in the NY area.
99% is low-balling it, cause I'm confident 70,000 people did not know of this.
Another reason to vote Eric Adams out
I heard from someone who works for that lot that there’s been internal rumors that Guardiola is resigning after the Club World Cup. Jumping ship now to distance himself as much as possible from inevitable sanctions perhaps?
there’s more chance of haaland coming back from the club world cup as an attractive woman.
I don't think anything he does can distance himself as he's very obviously used the whole situation to do what he's done there.
As much as I'd like to believe it, I can't see it.End of season if at all more likely. Even if he does and the charges are proven, he's tarnished.Then again, with doping and refs paid off on his watch, I'm not sure he'd be too bothered PSG will take him.
Jumping mid season not a chance only more likely to raise suspicions. If he's leaving City it'll be the end of the season
His tenure at Man C will always be tainted by the cheating regardless of when he leaves.
It will be revealed once St Pep leaves (2024?), and he will say he knew nothing about it.
The fact they are sleepwalking to another title should bring shame on the teams around them but also the PL for not making an effective decision.
Owen Hargreaves after the game: "this collection of great players, it's almost unfair" You think ?
I'd rather see Emery moonwalk to the title than these serial cheaters...
I'd rather see Emery moonwalk to the title than these serial cheaters...
The reason there has been no decision is because of the legal challenges. City imo, will get relegated when all is said and done and they also run the risk of getting denied entry to the Football League. I have outlined before that bringing the charges was the PL being serious in wanting to punish City, as they could've easily have done nothing after the CAS verdict.
The problem/delay is all to do with City trying to drag this out as much as possible, which is their right under UK law.
The only appropriate punishment is to ban them from the Football League, and remove their titles. Even relegation won’t impact them, they’ll just be back up at the earliest possibility and resume what they’re doing now.
They’re not a football club at the end of the day. The types of punishment that severely hurt other clubs won’t impact them. They’re a cheating franchise that need to be dealt with.
They’re not a football club at the end of the day. The types of punishment that severely hurt other clubs won’t impact them. They’re a cheating franchise that need to be dealt with.
The idea that these charges will lead to any sort of proportional FA punishment is for the birds - it’s never likely to happen.
A proportional response would be a stripping of all titles won during the periods involved, with no reallocation of the titles to the second placed team - plus relegation into the division below - a template would be the sanctions placed on juventus following calciopoli.
In reality, the FA is never placing those sorts of onerous sanctions on a club owned by an oil-rich state - especially when they’re being told by a central Tory government on its last legs that they can’t endanger important trade and investment from the UAE for an impoverished country cut off from europe and with endless failing services, high inflation, low productivity and no further room for manoeuvre on raising taxes to generate revenue for spending on services.
It’s exactly what happens when you invite theocratic rich foreign states with questionable ethics to own your football clubs as a sportswashing exercise in exchange for them throwing much needed money at upgrading the club and the surrounding impoverished city. Newcastle will shortly be following the same template. Barney Ronay wrote an excellent article about the realpolitik around all of this -
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...mine-manchester-citys-date-with-destiny-looms
A proportional response would be a stripping of all titles won during the periods involved, with no reallocation of the titles to the second placed team - plus relegation into the division below - a template would be the sanctions placed on juventus following calciopoli.
In reality, the FA is never placing those sorts of onerous sanctions on a club owned by an oil-rich state - especially when they’re being told by a central Tory government on its last legs that they can’t endanger important trade and investment from the UAE for an impoverished country cut off from europe and with endless failing services, high inflation, low productivity and no further room for manoeuvre on raising taxes to generate revenue for spending on services.
It’s exactly what happens when you invite theocratic rich foreign states with questionable ethics to own your football clubs as a sportswashing exercise in exchange for them throwing much needed money at upgrading the club and the surrounding impoverished city. Newcastle will shortly be following the same template. Barney Ronay wrote an excellent article about the realpolitik around all of this -
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...mine-manchester-citys-date-with-destiny-looms
Has Big Jim ever said anything about state ownership in the PL?
The guys built himself a £12 Billion fortune so it's safe to say he won't take any nonsense. Would be good if he could act as a disruptor. Most of the PL owners seem so passive on the issue, more interested in protecting their TV money than winning.
The guys built himself a £12 Billion fortune so it's safe to say he won't take any nonsense. Would be good if he could act as a disruptor. Most of the PL owners seem so passive on the issue, more interested in protecting their TV money than winning.
Probably after rules have been fiddled to save them.
This is going to be fun
Good one.