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
-
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.
4 -
Man City aren't a big deal internationally. They're like PSG, a club that people follow because they have great players and are currently successful (plus City were managed by Pep), rather than one with the history and historic global fanbase of United, Liverpool, Real Madrid etc
The Premier League would survive perfectly well without City, it's the loss of certain players to the PL like Haaland which would damage the "PL product" to international audiences more than the club itself.7 -
Do not expect any thing to happen, first they will take for ever deciding the punishments for the 114 infringements, then Man City will appealevery punishment, through every avenue they can. Man City can out spend the league on lawyers if they choose to.3
-
The only punishment that's fair is them having to watch Jones ball for 5 years1
-
2 -
never Mind the Bollocks …Premier League need now to show some real balls and throw the book at City….this whole murky saga has dragged on and on… why couldn’t they have issued the punishment at same time as this announcement?A fine & pts deduction City can absorb but being demoted to League Two with having their titles taken off is a real kick in the balls & sends out a massive statement that cheating doesn’t pay….How long before Haaland is playing for Real Madrid? followed by a mass exodus of the other “star” players…1
-
This will drag on for months, lots of mud slinging to and fro, lots of lawyers making lots of money
It's possible the Arab bankers who own the club can buy their way out of the mess. I REALLY hope not.
There must be a punishment to suit the crime. For example, like West Ham, city have use of a publicly owned stadium. Perhaps for a start, they should be evicted for their fraudulent behaviour
I have never liked man city way back to the Mercer/Allison days which set the template for their arrogant, snarling, don't give a fuck about anybody else attitude.
It's a pity that Pip did an early runner so as to avoid the fallout, Thank the lord we are unlikely to see his smirking, piss taking boat race too much in the future
Whatever is the outcome from this, the Premier League will take a long time to get over it. Many clubs, many people will have been, and remain affected. The football soap opera takes on a nasty plot for the 'writers' to unravel0 -
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.11 -
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.
11 -
a) the rules were originally implemented after a majority of premier league clubs voted in favour. They aren’t some Machiavellian scheme conjured up by Arsenal, Man Utd and Liverpool to maintain the status quo.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.b) owners - rich and poor - come and go but football clubs are now century old institutions. Any rules that protect the future of those clubs from the whims of whomever temporarily owns them is a good thing.4 -
Sponsored links:
-
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"3 -
I think the whistleblower is a hero and should not be pursued and harried and prosecuted as he is.8
-
PG obviously got told which way this was going and skipped.
Dont agree with stripping titles and cups- they were won in matches and nobody on or off the pitch would value a title gained that way.
L2 and transfer embargo for 4 seasons.
Just a shame not Liverpool or United. Dont think anyone has strong feelings in any way about City except perhaps Stockport0 -
It's not over until the fat lady sings......and it seems she hasn't even stood up yet, let alone cleared her throat.clive said:0 -
Would you prefer it if we didn’t employ him annd were outside the l1 relegation zone on goal difference?MrBurns said:The only punishment that's fair is them having to watch Jones ball for 5 years5 -
golfaddick said:
It's not over until the fat lady sings......and it seems she hasn't even stood up yet, let alone cleared her throat.clive said:
1 -
Relegation and 2 year transfer embargo, anything less would be a travesty0
-
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.2
-
Don’t think for one minute they’ll be stripped of any titles but if they are, it would be pointless to award them to the runners up.10
-
Sponsored links:
-
I don’t see how they can or will be relegated more than one division. The PL can relegate them to the EFL but they can’t impose any punishment once they’re there. If the relegation is because of a points deduction then they’ll be in the Championship, if they’re expelled then it’s for the EFL to decide. The easiest thing to do then is to put them in the Championship as you imagine the PL would only relegate two teams1
-
Are the EFL duty bound to accept them if they’re kicked out?4
-
Doubt it but they’d be silly not toDaveMehmet said:Are the EFL duty bound to accept them if they’re kicked out?2 -
It's OK folks, their chairman is confident he can explain it all - and it's just 114 small mistakes...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c6d944ylqkkeo7 -
Did FFP protect a club the size of Sheffield Wednesday? What has it done for Leicester who are apparently on the verge of administration?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.
Whilst we all understand why the rules are there, the other side of the argument is that FFP/PSR is anti-competitive and it only helps to keep the current rich and successful clubs at the top because they bring in the most revenue.
We have rules that prevent the world's richest owners (PIF) spending any money at Newcastle, and instead having to actually sell their best players. Rules that force Aston Villa's owners to sell half their team after qualifying for the Champions league twice in 3 years, whilst a side that finished 17th two years running can go out and spend 350m.
Chelsea are only up there because they spent like Man City did years before the rules came into place. If Abramovich took over now, he'd be stuck the same as PIF are at Newcastle.
It is going to be impossible now for a rich owner to take over a club, spend money like Abramovich and Mansour and see their team regularly compete at the top.5 -
So you're saying they knew but continued to buy expensive players whilst knowing there's a chance they may end up relegated and having to sell those same players off cheaply? Why would that make any sense?bolloxbolder said:In my opinion I suspect Guardiola and City knew the likely outcome over a year ago. Their spending in the last couple of windows has been obscene, probably because they knew a transfer embargo was incoming.
Their antics make me feel tbh. Relegate them to league 2 and strip them of every title.
It wasn't even a month ago they bought Enzo for 125m. If they're relegated he'll want to go and they'll be lucky to recoup half of that.
I personally think City expected to get away with most of the charges. I think they were probably arrogant and expected their money to buy the best lawyers to get them out of this mess and they are completely shocked by the 114 guilty verdicts.1 -
.0
-
Exactly what I said. They know their frivolous and vexatious appeal will tie the Premier League up for 2-3 years.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
So you're saying they knew but continued to buy expensive players whilst knowing there's a chance they may end up relegated and having to sell those same players off cheaply? Why would that make any sense?bolloxbolder said:In my opinion I suspect Guardiola and City knew the likely outcome over a year ago. Their spending in the last couple of windows has been obscene, probably because they knew a transfer embargo was incoming.
Their antics make me feel tbh. Relegate them to league 2 and strip them of every title.
It wasn't even a month ago they bought Enzo for 125m. If they're relegated he'll want to go and they'll be lucky to recoup half of that.
I personally think City expected to get away with most of the charges. I think they were probably arrogant and expected their money to buy the best lawyers to get them out of this mess and they are completely shocked by the 114 guilty verdicts.0 -
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.1 -
Let’s face it Arsenal have won numerous trophies through cheating since just after WW1. They should be stripped of all their titles/trophies, fined 200m and relegated to NLS.5
