Miggys First Goal Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Aye, this isn't just 1 or 2 breaches. Fucking 100. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 You can see legal challenges by City if this goes horribly wrong for them. FFP and owners financing their own clubs (businesses) before the high court or whatever court that has the legal powers to rule over this. If its dodgy accounting they could be fucked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Amazing they’ve been this bad at hiding it really, if it really is 100 things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 So what's the simple version ? They falsified their income to be able to spend more ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 6 hours ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Chelsea need investigating too, I think they've been the worst of the lot Chelsea have been the worst of the lot IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Chelsea could just be reckless, rather than dodgy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Depends on the accounting I guess. If Chelsea are just ploughing money in from the owner, they might breach FFP but in a much more simple way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 8 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said: So what's the simple version ? They falsified their income to be able to spend more ? So far as I'm aware, the main accusation is that some of their sponsorship money has in fact come from the owners, albeit indirectly. They're also accused of supplementing Mancini's salary through a covert route. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Let’s hope we don’t try to get money from companies related to PIF or anything of that nature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 3 minutes ago, TRon said: Chelsea have been the worst of the lot IMO. Didnt chelsea have revenue streams for servicing the 3.5bil debt they owed roman, and when that debt was removed they had fuck tons of legal revenue to spunk I dont agree with what chelsea have done, far from it. but they have a inexperienced yank (prem wise) who has gone gungho with that money on his latest plaything Which may go wrong in the not to distant future I am prob wrong with this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Cronky said: So far as I'm aware, the main accusation is that some of their sponsorship money has in fact come from the owners, albeit indirectly. They're also accused of supplementing Mancini's salary through a covert route. Inflating the income with sponsorship I get, but the Mancini thing is weird. Edited February 6, 2023 by Bimpy474 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said: Let’s hope we don’t try to get money from companies related to PIF or anything of that nature. If its all above board its allowable and within FMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Let’s hope we don’t try to get money from companies related to PIF or anything of that nature. Nothing against that in the rules as long as it’s fair market value though. I suspect where City have got it wrong is they created front companies to sponsor them who have no staff or business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 (edited) Yeah, actually occurred to me it might be OK as long as it comes from the capital of an established and profitable business. And they get something tangible back for it. Would be hard to prevent that if the accounting is all in order. Edited February 6, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdm Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 5 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Let’s hope we don’t try to get money from companies related to PIF or anything of that nature. Already have with Saudi Air have we not ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 3 minutes ago, danny said: Didnt chelsea have revenue streams for servicing the 3.5bil debt they owed roman, and when that debt was removed they had fuck tons of legal revenue to spunk I dont agree with what chelsea have done, far from it. but they have a inexperienced yank (prem wise) who has gone gungho with that money on his latest plaything Which may go wrong in the not to distant future I am prob wrong with this No idea tbh, just rubs me up the wrong way. First they spent their way to success using Roman's dirty cash, and even with him gone they just seem to be able to throw cash at every player going. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty66 Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 So are the Premier League going to punish them before Man City can challenge it? I mean they broke the PL rules so how is it then allowed for them to run to a CAT hearing and say well hear us out first. If the PL have charged them then the punishment follows directly surely? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidnolan13 Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 6 minutes ago, SAK said: Nothing against that in the rules as long as it’s fair market value though. I suspect where City have got it wrong is they created front companies to sponsor them who have no staff or business. yeah theyve had a few fake companies apparently and thats probably where theyll be hammered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 4 minutes ago, Scotty66 said: So are the Premier League going to punish them before Man City can challenge it? I mean they broke the PL rules so how is it then allowed for them to run to a CAT hearing and say well hear us out first. If the PL have charged them then the punishment follows directly surely? Normally a trial follows a charge to establish guilt. That’s what the special commission will do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghandis Flip-Flop Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 1 hour ago, James said: To confirm your identity, please answer the following question: What happens if an aircraft’s autopilot is set to ascend indefinitely? a fuckwit designed the control panel? I am Sparti-Yorkie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDog Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 Some of these accusations pre-date even FFP. They apparently violated PL rules, lied about it, covered it up the spent 5 years refusing to show their books per PL rules. These guys are kinda fucked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 34 minutes ago, et tu brute said: Those people are only here because PIF are involved, they wouldn't be if they were not. Ashworth was at Brighton, Eales at Atlanta, Silverstone at Arsenal, 2/3 are a step up regardless of whether PIF are here. So I disagree, but even if that were right it doesn't change how I'd want the club to function anyway. Brighton and Leicester operate in the same way afterall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 14 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Let’s hope we don’t try to get money from companies related to PIF or anything of that nature. It’s not a problem getting sponsorship from related party’s, the problem with what city was doing is they overinflated the deals massively Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
et tu brute Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said: Ashworth was at Brighton, Eales at Atlanta, Silverstone at Arsenal, 2/3 are a step up regardless of whether PIF are here. So I disagree, but even if that were right it doesn't change how I'd want the club to function anyway. Brighton and Leicester operate in the same way afterall. You're in the minority then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted February 6, 2023 Share Posted February 6, 2023 12 minutes ago, Scotty66 said: So are the Premier League going to punish them before Man City can challenge it? I mean they broke the PL rules so how is it then allowed for them to run to a CAT hearing and say well hear us out first. If the PL have charged them then the punishment follows directly surely? The PL have charged them, the independent commission will make a judgement and at that stage they can appeal but they won't be allowed to appeal via CAS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now