Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Manchester City’s 115 charges and legal action - Premier League statement p9
Comments
-
Make Manchester City play in a European Super League that is so super they’re the only ones in it.9
-
That’s a back to front way of looking at it, because initially, when a team gets pushed downwards, every team consequently gets pushed upwards one place. So, as a result, a team from each league gets promoted that wouldn’t otherwise have been. If Man City get shoved into League Two then to re-equilibrate the league system you’d have to add an extra promotion place into three divisions.MuttleyCAFC said:The problem is, if you relegate a team like City one division or three divisions, you are effectively doing one club a year out of promotion until City return to the Premier League. I accept they have to be punished but there isn't an ideal solution. Anything they won needs to be given to the team they defeated. Again not ideal but what can you do? The owners need kicking out of the game. I would look at suspending them from the Premier League and EFL until the owners leave.
Look at it this way, if ten teams from The Premier League got relegated to League One or Two then we could have 13 promotion places in the Championship, which would take the play offs down to 19th place! It can only help every other team, the opposite of what you state.1 -
I'm not sure the PL can choose to relegate City down to a specific level. The most they can do is surely just give them a massive points deduction, that would relegate them to the Championship next year.
Knowing their luck, Palace will finish 4th bottom this season, saved by the City points deduction...1 -
Traitor Pannick ? .. who's who has him down as a Gooner. There again, cash is more bankable than being a football club fan no matter where it comes fromAddicksAddict said:Bedsaddick said:
It would never happen . The Premier league don’t have the lawyers or the balls I’m afraid.EveshamAddick said:Hopefully a points deduction for City..The legal teams
Manchester City:
Leading the City team was David Pannick KC, one of the foremost barristers of his generation, renown for representing the rich and powerful. Previous clients include Queen Elizabeth II, Boris Johnson, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and more than one billionaire sheikh.
Lawyers may not earn as much as the Erling Haaland’s £500,000 a week but Pannick charges a none too shoddy £5,000 an hour. In 2019, Pannick charged £407,250 for defending Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber al-Thani, a former Qatari prime minister, involving a two-day trial, which the crossbench peer did not attend.
Paul Harris KC, a leading sport and commercial silk, also led City’s successful appeal before the court of arbitration for sport (Cas) against Uefa’s Champions League ban on the club for alleged breaches of financial fair play rules. He is said to have been a trusted adviser to the club for more than 20 years.
Premier League:
Adam Lewis KC is widely regarded as the country’s preeminent sports barrister and co-authored the leading textbook in the field. His significant cases include acting for Chelsea at Cas when they successfully halved a two-transfer-window ban imposed by Fifa. He also represented Premiership Rugby at an independent tribunal where the champions Saracens were found to have breached salary cap regulations.
Andrew Hunter KC’s prominent sports cases include rugby’s “bloodgate” scandal and Formula One’s spygate scandal when McLaren were fined $100m (then £50m) and docked all their points in the constructors’ championship when found in possession of documents belonging to Ferrari.
Jason Pobjoy KC represented the Premier League alongside Lewis as he did when Everton were docked points for breaching financial rules. Pobjoy argued that Everton’s “unreasonable conduct in the proceedings unnecessarily and significantly increased” costs for the league, which sought to recover £4.9m in lawyers’ fees. However, Everton argued the costs were “eye-watering” and were ordered to pay only £1.7m. Pobjoy has also represented the Football Association but is best known for his civil liberties, public and human rights law cases, including substantial pro bono work.
0 -
I'm trying to get a rough estimate of the sums involved in the breaches from City.
Der Spiegel mentions Sheikh Mansour spent ~£1.1bn in his first 4 years of ownership (2008-12), but City only had ~£645m income in that time (according to the Telegraph via Gemini), so they overspent about £113m per year.
Not sure whether all of that was in breach, or if there are additional sums. There seems to be very little on the web about the specifics.0 -
I assume any UEFA ban would be separate from the PL rulings, and follow on afterwards.
5 of the breaches concern UEFA rules on FFP, so a separate UEFA ban will surely follow. Even if they are only in the Championship for one season, having no European football for say 5 years (1 year for each breach) would cause a massive exodus of players.1 -
Yes of course you are right in that bigger clubs who can spend the most money should always be towards the top of the pyramid, unless their owners at the time do anything really stupid.ForeverAddickted said:redman said:
Do you really want football just to be about who can spend the most money?jimmymelrose said:I feel very differently to what seems to be the consensus on here.
My feelings stem from my dislike of FFP and whatever the other anachronisms for these rules are. They are made to protect the status quo and prevent clubs like Man City, Newcastle, Ipswich or other clubs with rich owners from reaching the top. These rules block these clubs from spending their money whilst those already raking it in from having been at the top for years preserve their position. As long as the owners are spending their own money I don’t see how it matters which business it came from. Did it matter that Elton John spent loads at Watford or that Jack Walker did it at Blackburn? Blackburn and Leicester both made the title race exciting. Then , of course, there's Tony Bloom at Brighton. Fairytales are what makes football exciting and you can’t do it anymore without money.
What should be on trial are the rules themselves. I’d dump these rules as much as I’d dump VAR.
(Tongue in cheek now): Play Blue Moon on the radio and tell Arsenal, Liverpool and Man United to go and stick their conservative rules up their arse.
If there must be a punishment, don’t make it retrospective and strip titles etc. That just makes a mockery of football. Just treat each ’offence’ with a points deduction and add them up. If it comes to let’s say 200 points, count them down the league at the end of the season.
So if Man City finish with 80 points and the bottom team with 30, that’s 50 points deducted. Then continue from the top to the bottom in the Championship, and so on. If you get to League 2 with, for example, 10 points deduction left then they start there with -10.
At the same time, relegate Arsenal now for cheating their promotion years ago through financial irregularities.
But as I say, my choice would be to do nothing and scrap the rules.
FFP is there to help protect clubs. Without we will see a multitude of clubs going out of business who can't keep up. In The league we've really only seen Bury so far but this could be the tip of the iceberg. Several big clubs could be threatened as they spend to try to keep up but fail, in huge debt.
We would be quickly be back in League 1 as FFP is at least giving us a half chance of competing in the Championship.(1) Football has always been about those who can spend the most money. Its now just designed to protect those who spent the most money at the right time - Lets not kid ourselves, its the same with most Sport not just Football, lets not pretend that there has ever truly been a romantic era of the Sport, where we've seen constantly plucky winners because they were smarter than the rest on the pitch.(2) FFP doesn't protect clubs... It hasn't stopped Sheffield Wednesday / Reading from almost going out of business since it was emulated, it helps protect the status quo, disguised as something that helps protect the clubs, but you'll still always be left with the shite owners who won't have any qualms about running clubs into the ground, after all FFP was around long before we saw what happened with Bury. Instead you'd "hope" that the regulator that has recently been brought in will do a better job of that, but you're still stuck with the issue in the EFL, which is the fact its a competition governed by its owners, and those same owners (on their own) will never agree to rules that could harm their own competitive chances.FFP / PSR is nothing more than an excuse for owners to turn round to the fans and go: "Aww sorry we cant spend what we'd like"Same as its an excuse for fans to turn round and go: "Wait you're spending more than my club, thats not fair"
I would argue that FPP hasn't been working very well so far is because the way it was implemented and big changes need to be made so clubs can't run up huge debts and commitments which have been the main problem.
It is my belief, and you're welcome to disagree, is that football needs more responsible owners and it will only happen by rules preventing mad spending and commitments.
I don't really want which division we are in just determined by how much our owners are willing to spend.0 -
If they were stripped of titles and cups, you're assuming that the runner up would automatically take their title?
Where do you stop though? As the semi finalists they beat to reach the final may have had a chance to win. The quarter finalist they beat?
What about relegated teams that went down by 4 points that they may have won against a weaker City team?3 -
I think the titles will just be voided in a similar way to Juventus. Massive can of worms but it needs to be opened imo.Ross said:If they were stripped of titles and cups, you're assuming that the runner up would automatically take their title?
Where do you stop though? As the semi finalists they beat to reach the final may have had a chance to win. The quarter finalist they beat?
What about relegated teams that went down by 4 points that they may have won against a weaker City team?7 -
4
-
Sponsored links:
-
If the Premier League deduct points leading to relegation, do the EFL have to accept them? Ditto Conference if EFL can say no.
Could the FA get involved? They deserve demotion to level six at best.
But legal action by wronged clubs are going to be expensive for Abu Dhabi, even without Iran's missiles.0 -
Nadou said:I think the whistleblower is a hero and should not be pursued and harried and prosecuted as he is.
What has he been prosecuted of?
1 -
-
I suppose that with the Premier League and EFL being different entities it would mean that City could not be demoted to League 2, I would imagine the biggest punishment they can get is a points deduction.1
-
Hacking and attempted extortion.ElfsborgAddick said:Nadou said:I think the whistleblower is a hero and should not be pursued and harried and prosecuted as he is.
What has he been prosecuted of?0 -
Stu_of_Kunming said:
Hacking and attempted extortion.ElfsborgAddick said:Nadou said:I think the whistleblower is a hero and should not be pursued and harried and prosecuted as he is.
What has he been prosecuted of?
Oh dear, that could prove very painful for him.
0 -
But there is a rumoured existence of a "golden ticket" which clubs need to compete in organised leagues. I assume the FA can withdraw it.ElfsborgAddick said:I suppose that with the Premier League and EFL being different entities it would mean that City could not be demoted to League 2, I would imagine the biggest punishment they can get is a points deduction.0 -
There is no “golden ticket”.
Clubs need the necessary affiliation, league membership and licensing to compete.
Those rights can be withdrawn, but there isn’t some mythical FA ticket that can simply be taken away.
1 -
There are all sorts of complications surrounding fines/points deductions/historical titles etc etc which will probably rumble on and on but the one cast iron thing that should happen but won’t is that City’s owners having now proved themselves not fit and proper should be unable to remain as owners/custodians of a football club and should be unable to have those positions again moving forward…6
-
These numbers cannot be right at all. There are 8 billion people in the world, so you're saying that 5% of the entire world support either Spurs or Villa?randy andy said:
I think you're massively overestimating how much the rest of the prenier league care about city (they don't give a shit and FFP was specifically designed to stop clubs like city threatening the entrenched "big clubs") and overestimating their global appeal.Radostanradical said:
Will not happen, its counter productive to the premier leagues aim.Athletico Charlton said:Probably get plenty of lols for this but I am certain they will get fined and relegated (either expulsion or such a huge points deduction it becomes redundant).
It's not just the rule breaking but the fact they have fought their corner and burnt £'ms of PL money on lawyers.
If it has cost League huge amounts of money (and I agree it probably has) they will want to recoup it and that becomes harder if you punish one of the most popular (in terms of international fans) teams who sign star players to come and play in the league.
None of this is me agreeing that they shouldnt be punished harshly just the harsh cynisism I have about what was once the crown jewell of british working class life that has been turnt in to a play thing for rich americans (and others).
The League will see any major punishment as counter productive to their business (and yes the people that run the premier league see it as a busisness not a competition).
The other premier league clubs will not want to see City punished as harsh as they should be as thats a guarenteed international television fixture and city bring more eyes to the prem. Even the top teams like Arsenal, Man U etc , have no real gain after all how much does it financially benefit them by being given a premier league title from 10 years ago?
I suspect we will see a record fine (which is nothing more than a cheating tax), a point deduction which will just be a handicap to not win the league and possibly individuals punished and banned for wrong doing.
Just for comparison, city supposedly have 130-140 million global fans, whilst Spurs have over 180 millions and villa have 220 million.
If city got thrown out the league tomorrow it wouldn't make a dent in the global viewing figures for the next round of matches, in fact it would probably increase numbers in the short term before settling back to the exact same figures it had last week.
There is no chance that Spurs and Villa are bigger globally than Man city.2 -
Sponsored links:
-
You just know that palace will effectively come 18th before a points deduction and they will be saved…3
-
They gave one of the titles to Inter who had a good gloat about it, (in terms of rivalry think Liverpool/Man Utd), everybody else called it "The Cardboard Scudetto". Juve spent 18 years appealing/demanding the titles back, they gave up in 2024, but still say they won them anyway - their website still claims 38 rather than 36 titles. I suppose they'll say that when you've won it that many times it's easy to miscount. I can't help thinking that sort of thing is a sneak preview of the next few years over here with City, they won't go quietly, that's for sure.mart77 said:
I think the titles will just be voided in a similar way to Juventus. Massive can of worms but it needs to be opened imo.Ross said:If they were stripped of titles and cups, you're assuming that the runner up would automatically take their title?
Where do you stop though? As the semi finalists they beat to reach the final may have had a chance to win. The quarter finalist they beat?
What about relegated teams that went down by 4 points that they may have won against a weaker City team?0 -
Spot on - the owners are still arrogantly proclaiming the club’s innocence and contending that “nothing’s changed”. Having misrepresented the club’s finances over multiple years, there is no way that they and their senior executives can satisfy the Regulator’s and the Premier League’s fit and proper person test.Fumbluff said:There are all sorts of complications surrounding fines/points deductions/historical titles etc etc which will probably rumble on and on but the one cast iron thing that should happen but won’t is that City’s owners having now proved themselves not fit and proper should be unable to remain as owners/custodians of a football club and should be unable to have those positions again moving forward…
In terms of any relegation, there would doubtless be a discussion between the Premier League and the EFL, who I imagine would be happy to accept Man City into the fold.
Claims by certain other Premier League clubs are also bound to be pursued, although there will be limitation issues which may provide City with partial time-bar defences unless the usual 6 year period can be extended to 3 years from the date of ‘knowledge’, as defined in the legislation. It is also possible that some clubs may have entered into ‘standstill’ agreements with City which operate to freeze the limitation period.I suppose the Premier League could try to set up some kind of arbitral panel to deal with the claims. Although the position and circumstances of each claimant will differ, one set of findings on the extent to which City enhanced their position each season by exceeding the FFP limits would clearly be helpful.0 -
While they need to be adequately punished, I do feel relegating them is then a punishment for EFL clubs too. Whichever league they end up in, they’ll likely get promoted, meaning that season, there’s already one less promotion spot for a current EFL side.Maybe for every season they’re proven of having cheated, that can be a 20 point deduction, and instead of all being put together this season, they should start the next 4-5 seasons in premier league with -20. Yes, they’d stay in premier league but it would make it impossible for them to win the league and very likely miss out on a European spot. That would still be a punishment for City as they’d miss out on a lot. On top of that add in a multiple window transfer ban and they’ll obviously be a fine, whether that part is seen as meaningless or not.1
-
Yeah if the charges stick after the appeal then i don't see how they can just continue with the same ownership given that some of the charges are basically fraud. If a bank was done for fraud all the senior execs would be fired and would potentially end up in prison.Fumbluff said:There are all sorts of complications surrounding fines/points deductions/historical titles etc etc which will probably rumble on and on but the one cast iron thing that should happen but won’t is that City’s owners having now proved themselves not fit and proper should be unable to remain as owners/custodians of a football club and should be unable to have those positions again moving forward…
Omar Berrada was at City for years and was their Chief Operating Officer for some of the time period covered in the charges. There's no chance he wouldn't have known what was happening and he is now Man Utd's CEO.0 -
Roberto Mancini held TWO contracts during his time as Manchester City manager. His official City deal paid him a basic salary of €1.69M net per year.A second agreement with Abu Dhabi club Al Jazira reportedly paid Mancini a further €2.03M for just FOUR DAYS of consultancy work per year. Both clubs were owned by Sheikh Mansour.4
-
I find it weird that given this is one of the more serious charges, Mancini himself said that at no point during the entire investigation did anyone contact him to give evidence about this.guinnessaddick said:Roberto Mancini held TWO contracts during his time as Manchester City manager. His official City deal paid him a basic salary of €1.69M net per year.A second agreement with Abu Dhabi club Al Jazira reportedly paid Mancini a further €2.03M for just FOUR DAYS of consultancy work per year. Both clubs were owned by Sheikh Mansour.1 -
How can you compare fergusons record with citys.Ferguson was at united nearly 4 years before he won a trophy.City came and just put unlimited cash towards instant success.Ferguson built his great team around wonderful home grown talent and very astute buying,not just hoovering up every top player that became available.Arsen Venger built his team from scratch and today Arsenal are still probably the best run club in the Premier league.I really hope that this does lasting damage to City,also Chelsea,as they are now slowly slipping from the top table.ForeverAddickted said:soapboxsam said:Obviously other than the freak year that Leicester won the Premier it's going to be a team with loads of money that wins titles; that is a Shay Given !
So Chelsea and Man can cheat on an industrial scale and that is ok and fans of other clubs shouldn't be bothered !
Blimey O'Riley ( Irish International 🤔) Chelsea won 21 trophies in 19 years under the Russian agent Oligarch Abramovich and if you don't have rules you have anarchy.
Man City have won 26 trophies since 2008 under the vast wealth of Abu Dhabi united group.
47 trophies that could have gone to other clubs iF the cheating started early in the tenure of either Clubs by the present owners of Man city and the past owner of Chelsea.So what about the trophies won by Arsenal / Man Utd / Liverpool in the decades before?Ferguson won around 30 trophies in a 20-year spell... Man City have won 26-trophies in an 18-year spell...Why was that okay? - Because the rules setup to protect those same clubs weren't in place? - Disguised as a means to protect the small clubs from themselves, so that the likes of Bury (when it eventually happened) would be a limited case, but hasn't stopped Sheff Wed / Reading from very almost going the same way.3 -
Sorry what?thickandthin63 said:
How can you compare fergusons record with citys.Ferguson was at united nearly 4 years before he won a trophy.City came and just put unlimited cash towards instant success.Ferguson built his great team around wonderful home grown talent and very astute buying,not just hoovering up every top player that became available.Arsen Venger built his team from scratch and today Arsenal are still probably the best run club in the Premier league.I really hope that this does lasting damage to City,also Chelsea,as they are now slowly slipping from the top table.ForeverAddickted said:soapboxsam said:Obviously other than the freak year that Leicester won the Premier it's going to be a team with loads of money that wins titles; that is a Shay Given !
So Chelsea and Man can cheat on an industrial scale and that is ok and fans of other clubs shouldn't be bothered !
Blimey O'Riley ( Irish International 🤔) Chelsea won 21 trophies in 19 years under the Russian agent Oligarch Abramovich and if you don't have rules you have anarchy.
Man City have won 26 trophies since 2008 under the vast wealth of Abu Dhabi united group.
47 trophies that could have gone to other clubs iF the cheating started early in the tenure of either Clubs by the present owners of Man city and the past owner of Chelsea.So what about the trophies won by Arsenal / Man Utd / Liverpool in the decades before?Ferguson won around 30 trophies in a 20-year spell... Man City have won 26-trophies in an 18-year spell...Why was that okay? - Because the rules setup to protect those same clubs weren't in place? - Disguised as a means to protect the small clubs from themselves, so that the likes of Bury (when it eventually happened) would be a limited case, but hasn't stopped Sheff Wed / Reading from very almost going the same way.
Ferguson broke the transfer record countless times and had a free run at most of the leagues top players (Rooney, Rio, Keane, Berbatov, Carrick, Cantona, Cole, Yorke, Ince, Van Persie, Sheringham etc) because United were the biggest club and had the most money.
If there was a player doing well at a lesser club, Ferguson tried to sign him. I think the only major ones he failed with domestically in 20+ years were Gazza and Shearer.6 -
Fixed it for you…Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Sorry what?thickandthin63 said:
How can you compare fergusons record with citys.Ferguson was at united nearly 4 years before he won a trophy.City came and just put unlimited cash towards instant success.Ferguson built his great team around wonderful home grown talent and very astute buying,not just hoovering up every top player that became available.Arsen Venger built his team from scratch and today Arsenal are still probably the best run club in the Premier league.I really hope that this does lasting damage to City,also Chelsea,as they are now slowly slipping from the top table.ForeverAddickted said:soapboxsam said:Obviously other than the freak year that Leicester won the Premier it's going to be a team with loads of money that wins titles; that is a Shay Given !
So Chelsea and Man can cheat on an industrial scale and that is ok and fans of other clubs shouldn't be bothered !
Blimey O'Riley ( Irish International 🤔) Chelsea won 21 trophies in 19 years under the Russian agent Oligarch Abramovich and if you don't have rules you have anarchy.
Man City have won 26 trophies since 2008 under the vast wealth of Abu Dhabi united group.
47 trophies that could have gone to other clubs iF the cheating started early in the tenure of either Clubs by the present owners of Man city and the past owner of Chelsea.So what about the trophies won by Arsenal / Man Utd / Liverpool in the decades before?Ferguson won around 30 trophies in a 20-year spell... Man City have won 26-trophies in an 18-year spell...Why was that okay? - Because the rules setup to protect those same clubs weren't in place? - Disguised as a means to protect the small clubs from themselves, so that the likes of Bury (when it eventually happened) would be a limited case, but hasn't stopped Sheff Wed / Reading from very almost going the same way.
Ferguson broke the transfer record countless times and had a free run at most of the leagues top players (Rooney, Rio, Keane, Milne, Berbatov, Carrick, Cantona, Cole, Yorke, Ince, Van Persie, Sheringham etc) because United were the biggest club and had the most money.
If there was a player doing well at a lesser club, Ferguson tried to sign him. I think the only major ones he failed with domestically in 20+ years were Gazza and Shearer.2
