oh dear! pl charges

[Dimples]

Harry,
I fully understand what you are saying mate but we are not as yet being investigated by the HMRC.
If it were the HMRC who were accusing us, then this would be investigated by them, refered to the CPS and tried by a court of law.
and your point obviously stands.

As it is, we are being investigated by a private institution and they do not have the powers to enforce English Law, they could if they wished, take their evidence to the HMRC but as a private institution, they can only enforce their own rules as they have been agreed by the Premier League members.

The Premier League have no right to judge and prosecute the legality of City's accounting, they are not part of the judicial system.

I agree with you John, but the point I was trying to make was, if the panel find us guilty our accounts will not be valid, therefore at that point HMRC could get involved and the CPS, they don’t have to be referred they can initiate investigation if there is probable cause.

Statutory accounts are a completely different thing to accounts prepared to fulfil a membership like the Premier League which requires completely different accounting rules to be applied. Just because the latter was cooked, doesn't automatically mean the former was.

This is indeed correct and The Government has no objection if an owner invests more private money into the Company.

Where the Premier League made a fatal mistake with FFP is not to get operational clearance from HMRC.

They new they would never get clearance because it is prohibiting free and fair competion. At the time even the European Commision were also not asked to get involved. Going through those two bodies FFP would have died a death.

What recourse do City have, if (when) the 'independent commission' find City guilty of not following the PL rule book?
Is it to challenge the 'independent commission's' guilty verdict in a court of law by proving that City did indeed follow the PL rule book?
(or could City challenge the validity of the PL rule book because it limits an owner's right to invests more private money into the Company which is illegal (even though it is a private members rule book)?

[zuricity]

Harry,
I fully understand what you are saying mate but we are not as yet being investigated by the HMRC.
If it were the HMRC who were accusing us, then this would be investigated by them, refered to the CPS and tried by a court of law.
and your point obviously stands.

As it is, we are being investigated by a private institution and they do not have the powers to enforce English Law, they could if they wished, take their evidence to the HMRC but as a private institution, they can only enforce their own rules as they have been agreed by the Premier League members.

The Premier League have no right to judge and prosecute the legality of City's accounting, they are not part of the judicial system.

I agree with you John, but the point I was trying to make was, if the panel find us guilty our accounts will not be valid, therefore at that point HMRC could get involved and the CPS, they don’t have to be referred they can initiate investigation if there is probable cause.

Statutory accounts are a completely different thing to accounts prepared to fulfil a membership like the Premier League which requires completely different accounting rules to be applied. Just because the latter was cooked, doesn't automatically mean the former was.

This is indeed correct and The Government has no objection if an owner invests more private money into the Company.

Where the Premier League made a fatal mistake with FFP is not to get operational clearance from HMRC.

They new they would never get clearance because it is prohibiting free and fair competion. At the time even the European Commision were also not asked to get involved. Going through those two bodies FFP would have died a death.

What recourse do City have, if (when) the 'independent commission' find City guilty of not following the PL rule book?
Is it to challenge the 'independent commission's' guilty verdict in a court of law by proving that City did indeed follow the PL rule book?
(or could City challenge the validity of the PL rule book because it limits an owner's right to invests more private money into the Company which is illegal (even though it is a private members rule book)?

I'm no Lawyer , but Lord Denning, who passed away some years ago made a mockery of many "rules" and Laws in his time.

We have already seen how FFP rules were modified after City first complied with the FFP requirements in it's first year.

FFP was introduced because of pressure from the G14 mob. Who wanted to keep all the monies from the Champions League for themselves.

Indeed, maybe some clubs were slow to catch on but the likes of Burnley, Soton , Brighton , without a Blackburn type investor can never see Champions League on a regular basis if they are only allowed to spend what they currently turnover.

Here's one of the problems the Rags , Scouse and Arse have.

When our owner bought the club , he paid less than 200 mill - just like the Saudi's have just paid about 300 mill for Newcastle.

Within the ten or so years the owner has diligently managed City, City has moved to the biggest turnover in the PL. Forget how ever many years clubs have existed but if the Rags are being bandied about ( even with their massive Debt and need for a new Toilet ) at 5 Bill. Given the current squads, set ups , infrastructure, management and Turnover, where does that put City ? 6 billion. Forget History, forget apparent world wide audiences, City is rapidly gaining on the others world wide .

Not bad for a 200 mill initial purchase.

Now the shysters ( and that is the correct term) over at old toilet, borrowed almost 800 mill at high interest to buy the Rags , Loaded the rags up with debt,
keep sucking money out and want to sell off . Knowing that the Debt hasn't gone away, and about 1 bill is needed to keep any new Stadium going.

The goverment needed to step in to prevent these people loading the debt on the rags. it should never have been allowed . All that money is being sucked out of the PL ( and the rags).

FFP my *rse, it is time to rebuild the FA and PL in England out with the bath water , these so- called Adminstrators need to be replaced with independent people.

[Mase]

Someone on BM has mentioned these comments -

From March 2014. Manchester United's troubled defence of their Premier League title is harming the English top flight's worldwide brand, says the competition's chief executive Richard Scudamore. "It's a double-edged sword," said Scudamore. "When your most popular club isn't doing as well, that costs you interest and audience in some places."

August 2016: Speaking to Sky Sports News HQ from the Premier League launch in Islington, north London, Richard Scudamore said: "Without being disrespectful to any club, we have a strategic plan at the Premier League and the strategic plan says putting a new name on the trophy in every six-year period. That doesn't mean we don't want any team to win it. It just means we would rather see some sort of rotation, for all neutrals in the game (what Leicester achieved) was a big moment."

[Im_Spartacus]

Harry,
I fully understand what you are saying mate but we are not as yet being investigated by the HMRC.
If it were the HMRC who were accusing us, then this would be investigated by them, refered to the CPS and tried by a court of law.
and your point obviously stands.

As it is, we are being investigated by a private institution and they do not have the powers to enforce English Law, they could if they wished, take their evidence to the HMRC but as a private institution, they can only enforce their own rules as they have been agreed by the Premier League members.

The Premier League have no right to judge and prosecute the legality of City's accounting, they are not part of the judicial system.

I agree with you John, but the point I was trying to make was, if the panel find us guilty our accounts will not be valid, therefore at that point HMRC could get involved and the CPS, they don’t have to be referred they can initiate investigation if there is probable cause.

Statutory accounts are a completely different thing to accounts prepared to fulfil a membership like the Premier League which requires completely different accounting rules to be applied. Just because the latter was cooked, doesn't automatically mean the former was.

This is indeed correct and The Government has no objection if an owner invests more private money into the Company.

Where the Premier League made a fatal mistake with FFP is not to get operational clearance from HMRC.

They new they would never get clearance because it is prohibiting free and fair competion. At the time even the European Commision were also not asked to get involved. Going through those two bodies FFP would have died a death.

What recourse do City have, if (when) the 'independent commission' find City guilty of not following the PL rule book?
Is it to challenge the 'independent commission's' guilty verdict in a court of law by proving that City did indeed follow the PL rule book?
(or could City challenge the validity of the PL rule book because it limits an owner's right to invests more private money into the Company which is illegal (even though it is a private members rule book)?

As a membership-based organisation the PL can set whatever rules they like providing they are agreed by the members. However if it all gets gloves off down the line, I suspect one of the things CFG will be leveraging against the PL will be the threat that they will throw the kitchen sink at the PL regarding anti-competetive or even corrupt practices (eg inability to get a fair hearing etc).

Problem now is that the PL have shown their hand, this is going to be very hard to put all this back in the box, so either City are going to get fucked, or the PLs reputation will end up in tatters as a sports administrator. Or both.

There's going to be a big loser one way or another unless this all just goes away, and I suspect CFG have determined that they've had enough of the accusations so will go the whole 9 yards so they get cleared rather than accept the compromise that happened with CAS.

[Dimples]

Thanks Spartacus for the explanation.

I miss the good old days. Go to a match, enjoy the football, curse the Ref's mistakes and accept victory or defeat because it was a level playing field.
Sad how far football has fallen from that, to a WWF PL global big business where the only thing that really matters is the bottom line.