2023-2024 EPL Season

[Jersey Fresh]

Difference between City and those clubs probably is that City have the wherewithal and business smarts to hire the best set of commercial lawyers and accountants possible to set up their structure while those clubs are run by buffoons.

I’m not even sure it’s that complicated. I mean, yeah they have the money to throw around to stall/muddy/slow-roll these investigations in legal red tape, but at the end of the day I think it just comes down to the fact that they’re a so-called “big” club. They play by a different set of rules because they move the needle for the league. It’s in their interest to protect them.

There's also a business implication to keep inflating the numbers, keep the top talent, manager and 'story' here in the EPL. Everton getting smacked? Eh who cares. Forest? Relegate them, whoopy doo.

City brings ratings, numbers and 'sponsors' (though those are 1000% inflated).

I have no knowledge, but I will not be shocked when some of the regulators / administrators are also on the take.

These other clubs have money for lawyers. But they turned over their books saying they were breaking the regulations. City turned over books saying they're squeaky clean. The only reason there's any suggestions of malfeasance is the actual books were leaked.

Exactly.

 

[hatterson]

Difference between City and those clubs probably is that City have the wherewithal and business smarts to hire the best set of commercial lawyers and accountants possible to set up their structure while those clubs are run by buffoons.

The difference between Everton/Forest and City is that Everton and Forest submitted honest books but disagreed with the PL on how to interpret some of the losses (Forest believed they could pull the Johnson sale forward to offset losses, Everton had some stuff around COVID IIRC). City, on the other hand, submitted fraudulent books and has spent an absolute fortune on lawyers, shell companies, fake sponsorships, etc. to hide it.

It's like the difference in the IRS between auditing a guy who says "yea I earned $10,000 betting on sports but I didn't think I had to pay tax on that so I didn't" and a guy who established 45 shell companies to hide money and income all over. In one case it's just a simple application of the rules in the other it's a massive investigation to figure out what the facts actually are.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

I think Man City is less straightforward as it assume cooking the book to not report losses. This is not just financial negligence. It's also criminal.

It is way more complex in nature than just interpreting what is reported as losses or not for Everton or Forrest.

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

The difference between Everton/Forest and City is that Everton and Forest submitted honest books but disagreed with the PL on how to interpret some of the losses (Forest believed they could pull the Johnson sale forward to offset losses, Everton had some stuff around COVID IIRC). City, on the other hand, submitted fraudulent books and has spent an absolute fortune on lawyers, shell companies, fake sponsorships, etc. to hide it.

It's like the difference in the IRS between auditing a guy who says "yea I earned $10,000 betting on sports but I didn't think I had to pay tax on that so I didn't" and a guy who established 45 shell companies to hide money and income all over. In one case it's just a simple application of the rules in the other it's a massive investigation to figure out what the facts actually are.

It's absolutely this and you're spot on, but I do think there is also incentivized foot-dragging on the league's part because they don't want to have to bring the hammer down on City. Some hope that if they drag it out enough maybe the regulations will loosen and they can do a post-hoc amnesty.

 

[Savant]

Difference between City and those clubs probably is that City have the wherewithal and business smarts to hire the best set of commercial lawyers and accountants possible to set up their structure while those clubs are run by buffoons.

City is the only club that hangs banners for their legal team

 

[hatterson]

It's absolutely this and you're spot on, but I do think there is also incentivized foot-dragging on the league's part because they don't want to have to bring the hammer down on City. Some hope that if they drag it out enough maybe the regulations will loosen and they can do a post-hoc amnesty.

Oh for sure. It's a much more complicated situation, but also I think the PL is trying to slow walk it a bit in hopes they get an ideal situation where they can hand out a heavy punishment but not actually hurt City with it. Something like City winning the CL but losing the PL by a point. Then they can hand out some massive 50-60 point punishment that leaves City just above the drop zone. They don't get relegated and they're still in the CL the next year.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

It's absolutely this and you're spot on, but I do think there is also incentivized foot-dragging on the league's part because they don't want to have to bring the hammer down on City. Some hope that if they drag it out enough maybe the regulations will loosen and they can do a post-hoc amnesty.

If it's fraud there are no amnesty to be done, it can lead to criminal cases.

The issue with Man City is not a simple losses related, like you forgot to include this cost into your income statement or miscalculated it, it's the opposite, it's revenue related, they used a scheme to boost revenue from sponsorship income. They have issued related parties transactions to boost the revenue into City group and avoid losses and punishment for these losses and avoid punishment from the EPL.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The difference between Everton/Forest and City is that Everton and Forest submitted honest books but disagreed with the PL on how to interpret some of the losses (Forest believed they could pull the Johnson sale forward to offset losses, Everton had some stuff around COVID IIRC). City, on the other hand, submitted fraudulent books and has spent an absolute fortune on lawyers, shell companies, fake sponsorships, etc. to hide it.

It's like the difference in the IRS between auditing a guy who says "yea I earned $10,000 betting on sports but I didn't think I had to pay tax on that so I didn't" and a guy who established 45 shell companies to hide money and income all over. In one case it's just a simple application of the rules in the other it's a massive investigation to figure out what the facts actually are.

And the latter scenario involves thousands of man hours of obfuscating and delaying and misdirecting, man hours City are happy to bill.

City's transgression at the 'obvious' level is much much more serious than what any of those clubs are accused of, hence why there's so much outrage about it, but that also means in detail there's far more effort involved in making it not a 'slam dunk' case but one that can be drawn out for years and years and without having any serious effect on the club.

Imagine the meltdown that happens if City are found guilty some time in 2026 and are deducted points for the concerned campaigns in the past, but given no penalty for the season going on at that time. I mean people say that City are 'protected' because of their status, but honestly their status also means there's millions of people in the UK alone who want to see them get destroyed.

 

[Chimaera]

It's way too complicated, but from what I can gather, there's a couple different accused issues.

There's inflated revenues, which, arguably, because the entity that owns City, likely has some stake in the places that are doing the overpaying, or at minimum, companies who want to do business with the entities that own the club are overpaying for gain down the road.

But there's also a bit of supposed off books payments to players, agents, associated projects and the like.

The first issue is much harder to regulate and prove. Everyone knows its phony, but that might be harder to dispute in court. The second issue is also difficult, as unless you have a smoking gun of proof, you can't fully prove it either. There's a lot of grey area in contracts, agent money, and other financial payments that count for FFP, and some that aren't really clear.

It's clear that City likely was involved in both and probably to a massive extent. But how you prove it and how you punish them is complicated unless you have cooperation. What's the incentive to cooperate for parties involved?

I think it's more likely you see some type of retroactive punishment, a hefty fine, and a 'nod nod, wink wink' to operate more in the open in the future. At this point, City's revenues, player accumulation and winnings have likely accomplished what they had set out, no matter the punishment. What likely was inflated sponsor fees for things could be closer to reality because they have won everything they should.

 

[hatterson]

If it's fraud there are no amnesty to be done, it can lead to criminal cases.

The issue with Man City is not losses related, it's the opposite, it's revenue related. They have issued related parties transactions to boost the revenue into City group and avoid losses and punishment.

City's charges include:

- Hiding payments to managers/players
- Creating false revenue
- Hiding other relevant operating costs
- Submitting false books
- Not properly cooperating with the investigation

 

[Chimaera]

Imagine the meltdown that happens if City are found guilty some time in 2026 and are deducted points for the concerned campaigns in the past, but given no penalty for the season going on at that time. I mean people say that City are 'protected' because of their status, but honestly their status also means there's millions of people in the UK alone who want to see them get destroyed.

There are many who want to see them punished. Just like there are many people who would be gleeful at charges on any of the big clubs. The reality of the stomach of the league to fight it in court and the joy some supporters might take are much different situations. Additionally, I think the problem is at the top, there's some benefit as well about not having it all aired in court or having seasons tainted. You can't really run press videos and sell the EPL as this great league, if your banner team you kinda have to put an asterisk on every single highlight video. You might as well have the AGUERRRRRRROOOOO video with a subtitle of "this win was under dispute and cheating". I mean... you could argue some of the damage done by Juve to Serie A is likely still an issue (though no where near the same)

 

[hatterson]

It's way too complicated, but from what I can gather, there's a couple different accused issues.

There's inflated revenues, which, arguably, because the entity that owns City, likely has some stake in the places that are doing the overpaying, or at minimum, companies who want to do business with the entities that own the club are overpaying for gain down the road.

But there's also a bit of supposed off books payments to players, agents, associated projects and the like.

The first issue is much harder to regulate and prove. Everyone knows its phony, but that might be harder to dispute in court. The second issue is also difficult, as unless you have a smoking gun of proof, you can't fully prove it either. There's a lot of grey area in contracts, agent money, and other financial payments that count for FFP, and some that aren't really clear.

It's clear that City likely was involved in both and probably to a massive extent. But how you prove it and how you punish them is complicated unless you have cooperation. What's the incentive to cooperate for parties involved?

I think it's more likely you see some type of retroactive punishment, a hefty fine, and a 'nod nod, wink wink' to operate more in the open in the future. At this point, City's revenues, player accumulation and winnings have likely accomplished what they had set out, no matter the punishment. What likely was inflated sponsor fees for things could be closer to reality because they have won everything they should.

Yea that's the big thing. Because the enforcement was so lax for so long, and because CAS is hilariously corrupt, they accomplished their goals. Even if the PL relegates them, they'd be back in the PL within a year.

They've managed to turn a mid table team into a global name with a world class stadium, academy, and training grounds. A 1 year blip isn't suddenly going to stop their talent pipeline. Even a multi-year continental competition ban wouldn't really hurt them too much. It would hurt recruitment for a couple years, but they'd be back near the top pretty quickly given the infrastructure that exists.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Yea that's the big thing. Because the enforcement was so lax for so long, and because CAS is hilariously corrupt, they accomplished their goals. Even if the PL relegates them, they'd be back in the PL within a year.

They've managed to turn a mid table team into a global name with a world class stadium, academy, and training grounds. A 1 year blip isn't suddenly going to stop their talent pipeline. Even a multi-year continental competition ban wouldn't really hurt them too much. It would hurt recruitment for a couple years, but they'd be back near the top pretty quickly given the infrastructure that exists.

The only 'permanent' damage would be anything that causes Abu Dhabi to disengage, which is difficult to imagine unless there's political interference (and that's very unlikely given the UK government has traditionally always played very nice with the Arab oil states).

 

[Chimaera]

the other issue is there's NO punishment coming from the UEFA side.

EPL is doing this alone. There are plenty of clubs who are happy to get City and allegedly, some clubs, likely Liverpool, United and others turned them in. I just don't know how any of the people who run things have the stomach for it.

 

[hatterson]

the other issue is there's NO punishment coming from the UEFA side.

EPL is doing this alone. There are plenty of clubs who are happy to get City and allegedly, some clubs, likely Liverpool, United and others turned them in. I just don't know how any of the people who run things have the stomach for it.

There's no punishment from the UEFA side because CAS was bought and paid for (or, I suppose, just naturally corrupt)

UEFA banned them for 2 years and then CAS said "lol actually since they lied about it for a long time you can't punish them"

 

[Savant]

There's no punishment from the UEFA side because CAS was bought and paid for (or, I suppose, just naturally corrupt)

UEFA banned them for 2 years and then CAS said "lol actually since they lied about it for a long time you can't punish them"

I believe there was no punishment from UEFA because City’s legal stalled in long enough so the case became time barred. City was guilty, but didn’t get charged because of statue of limitations

 

[hatterson]

I believe there was no punishment from UEFA because City’s legal stalled in long enough so the case became time barred. City was guilty, but didn’t get charged because of statue of limitations

Right. CAS said that because they lied about their books for long enough and stalled the investigation long enough, UEFA couldn't actually punish them for it. It's an absurd decision.

 

[GeoRox89]

Sigh… This is why you can’t do stupid things like giving up last minute winners 8 minutes into added time or continue to not be able to defend set pieces and give up equalizers

Would be 3 points clear right now instead of 1 behind but no…

Only possible saving grace here now is the away matches left are against Burnley, Sheffield, Everton and Spurs so there’s a good shot to pick up points in 2-3 of them and while City might as well be an auto loss Palace, Fulham, Wolves and Chelsea are all at the City Ground so there’s something to work with there

 

[Savant]

Right. CAS said that because they lied about their books for long enough and stalled the investigation long enough, UEFA couldn't actually punish them for it. It's an absurd decision.

Kind of funny that REDACTED is pretty much using the same strategy right now in the USA and it’s also working.

 

[AlanHUK]

Think the points deduction we got is pretty fair, club statement after it takes a shot at the league regarding the idiocy of the account period, and the way they've structured rules to the benefit of an elite few.

So might see an appeal based on that, but I'd rather just take the 4 and move on with nothing hanging over the team now.

We've dropped 21 points from winning positions so far this season, so if we hadn't been so shit at defending set pieces (and not got shafted multiple times by VAR) we'd be safe now anyway.

 

[S E P H]

Right. CAS said that because they lied about their books for long enough and stalled the investigation long enough, UEFA couldn't actually punish them for it. It's an absurd decision.

But they still can be punished by the FA and that's still ongoing currently, correct?

 

[hatterson]

But they still can be punished by the FA and that's still ongoing currently, correct?

FA has different rules, but still a few years ago City would have been able to appeal any FA punishments to CAS as well (with likely similar results), but thanks to Brexit (how many times has that ever been typed lol) that’s not an option anymore.

 

[JPBolts]

announced today that Spurs and Newcastle are going to Australia for a post season friendly.

 

[robertmac43]

Statement from Forest:

 

[Savant]

The Luckiest