Because City's charges are intertwined. City only breached the PL's PSR rules on the basis that they provided false accounts - if the charges that they provided false accounts aren't proven then the charges related to breaching PSR will be dropped. It's literally not possible to settle City's breach of PSR charges until the rest has been settled.On another note, people have mentioned on here that City’s situation is different to Everton and Forest‘s, and thats why it’s taking so long to punish City , but apparently 7 or the 115 charges are due to Breaches of Premier League profitability and sustainability regulations from 2015/16 to and including 2017/18, so if the Premier League are fast tracking Everton and Forest’s charges and punishments why haven’t they done the same to City, as P&S is cut and dry and not open to interpretation.
Full breakdown of Man City's 115 charges as trial expected to start on Monday
❌️ Charges Trial date set What this means for Citywww.givemesport.com
The Great Big FFP Debate
- Thread starter Reuben klang
- Start date
Soldato
Thanks for clearing that up
Is the false accounts thing basically the artificially inflated sponsorship deals?
I believe it's several things, including payments from 3rd parties to pay for certain contracts...example something along the lines of a £10M payment from some company around the time they agreed a £10M contract for one of their managers or something.
This is proper 'back door' stuff to hide finances.
Yep, among a few other things like image right payments.
Soldato
Kangaroo courts tend not find those that are tried innocent!
It was cas that 'let them off', due to time baring I believe. Uefa gave them a 2 year ban and 50 million fine (around that sort of figure iirc).
These posts always make me laugh. UEFA charged them and found them guilty. The PL have charged them. There is nothing more either UEFA or the PL could or can do so to say they've folded or don't have the willpower couldn't be further from the truth. Whether they're ultimately found guilty is out of the PL's hands (like it was UEFA's) and will will be decided by legal experts.
A lot of people are expecting City to be found guilty because of the content of the leaked emails but listening to bits from some legal eagles and those that understand these sorts of charges better, it will be far from as straight forward as that and the PL will need to have a lot more evidence than what's in the public domain.
Burden of proof will have to be massive. Not just some leaked emails. With the amount of charges and who they are accusing.
If found guilty there’s no other punishment suitable other than complete relegation through the leagues.
If found guilty there’s no other punishment suitable other than complete relegation through the leagues.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Depends on how much it was over, which no one knows. Same with Forest, the details haven't been publicly released.
The 6 points = 1 point per £3.25m over, based on being £19.5m.
But the Appeal Board felt the argument in regards to 9 point deduction for administration had some force.
So I guess there's a technical argument that anyone can't get above 8 points, regardless of overspend.
Also conduct and behavior seems to have a strong play in judgement too - so it seems like it being a simple mathematical formula isn't true. But who knows.
Just skimming the written reasons, it's still incredibly unclear as to how this or future penalties will be calculated . The appeal board pretty much threw out all of Everton's mitigation, as the original commission did barring giving the club some (but only very little) credit for showing a positive trend in their finances. In relation to the aggravating factors, they accepted pretty much all the same points as the original commission with the exception to the point about Everton being dishonest (Everton providing that incorrect info was still an aggravating factor), stating the commission shouldn't have found that as the PL hadn't accused Everton of that. It was just a question of what is a fair proportionate punishment and what benchmarks do you use to reach that number because the PL don't have a set formula themselves.
It appears they've based the 6 points on the EFL's formula which is basically a 3 point starting point with additional points per £x over the limit and then +/- points for mitigating and aggravating factors. However right at the end of the written reasons they state the following which would indicate that the EFL's 3 point starting point wasn't what they used:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 934
I think 6 points is a joke.. so basically spend what you want.. and you're only two wins behind others..
I thought 10 points was very lenient.. other clubs have sold lots of their best players.. to comply with FFP.. 6 points is a kick in the teeth for those clubs..
It's basically a non-punishment..
R.
edit: ManC laywers must be rubbing their hands.. (and yes I know it's different.. but it's basically pay to win.. which is what they did!! )
I thought 10 points was very lenient.. other clubs have sold lots of their best players.. to comply with FFP.. 6 points is a kick in the teeth for those clubs..
It's basically a non-punishment..
R.
edit: ManC laywers must be rubbing their hands.. (and yes I know it's different.. but it's basically pay to win.. which is what they did!! )
Last edited:
It's farcical.
No other way of saying it really.
It is actually making the Premiership a bit of a joke.
Soldato
6 points is just a couple of bad days at the office - proper punishments required or it’s open season on financial dopping. Watch them stay up by 3 points or something now
Everton's breach equates to circa £120k per week or a single players wages. What is a proportionate punishment for that advantage?
Is it so when they add up Man City’s 115 breaches they only go to the Championship for 1 season instead of non-league?
Working on a few assumptions, trying to work out what penalty Everton could receive for the 2nd charge.
Everton haven't contested that they breached the rules and pretty much all their mitigation was dismissed by both the original commission and the appeal panel. The appeal panel determined that a points penalty has to be the punishment for a PSR breach. So Everton's guilt and the fact that they're going to face another points penalty is pretty much a given but how many points?
Now obviously we don't know yet just how big Evertons breach was for the 2nd charge for the 3 year cycle to the end of the 22/23 season however in the written reasons the appeal panel seemed to suggest that 6 points is the minimum punishment required to make sure the rules are stuck to. Assuming Everton aren't any more over the limits for this charge as they were the last, let's assume the starting point for their penalty is 6 points before mitigation etc. Everton will no doubt argue that they've already been punished for 2 of the 3 accounting periods this charge relates to and that's a perfectly reasonable argument to make. Assuming that's successful, I guess the pro-rata penalty would be 2 points. You'd then imagine the PL will put forward the fact that Everton have continued to breach PSR for a 2nd season as an aggravating factor. What's the odds on Everton being hit with the 4 points they've just had back?
Everton haven't contested that they breached the rules and pretty much all their mitigation was dismissed by both the original commission and the appeal panel. The appeal panel determined that a points penalty has to be the punishment for a PSR breach. So Everton's guilt and the fact that they're going to face another points penalty is pretty much a given but how many points?
Now obviously we don't know yet just how big Evertons breach was for the 2nd charge for the 3 year cycle to the end of the 22/23 season however in the written reasons the appeal panel seemed to suggest that 6 points is the minimum punishment required to make sure the rules are stuck to. Assuming Everton aren't any more over the limits for this charge as they were the last, let's assume the starting point for their penalty is 6 points before mitigation etc. Everton will no doubt argue that they've already been punished for 2 of the 3 accounting periods this charge relates to and that's a perfectly reasonable argument to make. Assuming that's successful, I guess the pro-rata penalty would be 2 points. You'd then imagine the PL will put forward the fact that Everton have continued to breach PSR for a 2nd season as an aggravating factor. What's the odds on Everton being hit with the 4 points they've just had back?
From memory.Is it so when they add up Man City’s 115 breaches they only go to the Championship for 1 season instead of non-league?
Didn't Pep say he would walk if this came to fruition?