• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Emirates Marketing Project

According to the telegraph the prem doesn't have the power to relegate a team (unless through points deduction), it does have the power to expel them from the league. But if it does so, the efl have no obligation to accept them (not sure if they could as it would be an extra team). So if they are expelled city would have to find a league to play in.

Edit - the prem would have to take an extra team from the efl to make up the shortfall. Unless they wanted to drop the league to 19 teams which might be a thing with extra games in the european competitions.
 
Lilbaz said:
As recently as 2021 six activists associated with the environmental protest organisation Extinction Rebellion were tried for causing criminal damage to the British headquarters of the multinational oil company Royal Dutch Shell. The judge told the jury that there was 'no defence in law' for the protestors' actions, which according to the prosecutor had caused 'significant damage' to the building, but the activists were acquitted

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
Click to expand...

That one case you've found out of the average 1,000,000 prosecutions the UK have annually. I'm not saying in an ideal world that's the way it should be but in reality it doesnt happen that often. Would it have been justice if they were acquitted after coming round and damaging your home?
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
That one case you've found out of the average 1,000,000 prosecutions the UK have annually. I'm not saying in an ideal world that's the way it should be but in reality it doesnt happen that often. Would it have been justice if they were acquitted after coming round and damaging your home?
Click to expand...

There are other examples in there.

I never said it happens often. Tbh juries don't usually know they have the power and will follow what the judge or law says (which the vast majority of the time they are right to do so). But on the very rare occasions they do think the judge and law are wrong, they do have the power to go against them. On the flip side it does leave it open to abuse with jury tampering.
 
City do need to explain how they managed to bake so much bread in such a small oven.

They were a yo-yo club who had been gifted a stadium.

So really any success they have had over and above West Ham should be nullified.
 
johnola said:
City do need to explain how they managed to bake so much bread in such a small oven.

They were a yo-yo club who had been gifted a stadium.

So really any success they have had over and above West Ham should be nullified.
Click to expand...

Seems they had 4 years to explain and have done everything they could not to have to explain. Which are some of the charges against them. Blocking the investigation.
 
johnola said:
That’s the least relevant part.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. The prem isn't uefa. It's a membership of 20 clubs. Some of those clubs might change each year but it's still a membership. It seems City haven't just broken rules. They purposefully broke those rules, using different measures to hide it. After getting caught they have done everything possible to stop/delay any investigation.

This isn't just about breaking rules. It's about lying and embarrassing the league. (Which there are rules against in the handbook). Also a sense of betrayal.
 
Lilbaz said:
So does oxford university.

So, the laws governing the jury leave jurors the freedom to ignore the law or the judge’s guidance on how the law should be applied.

Because the jury’s reasoning is not in question, their verdict is taken at face value with some very rare exceptions

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2021/05/a-jurors-guide-to-going-rogue/#:~:text=So, the laws governing the,with some very rare exceptions.
Click to expand...

That's because it isn't up to the jury to decide how the law is applied.
The laws are the guiding principles that see a breach of the law taken to a court.
As we have gone down the criminal justice route in conversation (note, laws are not just there to police crimes),the role of a jury to decide upon whether the evidence branches the law. How the law is applied to the circumstances has happened before trial by the police and CPS and then after conviction by the judge on behalf of the public when applying sentencing (within the constraints of the sentencing guidelines - which in and of themselves and act as an arbitor of the level to which justice is both defined and applied)
 
braineclipse said:
Punishment for cheating is often not proportional to the benefits gained from that cheating.

At this point both the extent of the benefit they've had and what the punishment will be is up in the air and everyone's just speculating.

A point deduction may very well end up looking like a lighter punishment than most people think would be fair. Though City are also contesting the allegations, so not much to be known at this point.
Click to expand...
The punishment needs to be enough that others won't just follow suit.

If it's a one-off points deduction that falls well short of serious damage to the club then the sensible thing for Saudi Sportswashing Machine to do is spend a couple of £bn, take one difficult season and then win the league.
 
The punishment that needs to be considered is the owners forced to sell.

They may have once 'passed' the fit and proper owners test but how could they now?

They've run roughshod over the league and it's rules and have shown zero accountability or cooperation.

They simply shouldn't be welcome anymore.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
The punishment that needs to be considered is the owners forced to sell.

They may have once 'passed' the fit and proper owners test but how could they now?

They've run roughshod over the league and it's rules and have shown zero accountability or cooperation.

They simply shouldn't be welcome anymore.
Click to expand...

Don't think that would be legal. You need a buyer.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Unfortunately I'm not convinced they will be. Chelsea's sponsorship deals have tended to be proper commercial deals as opposed to being from companies under their owners' umbrella. I also don't think Chelsea were paying their players and coaching staff large amounts for spurious overseas assignments.
Click to expand...

Was more talking about the previous bloke, but truth is, too many are wrapped up in that for it to go anywhere. I do think that if someone wanted to dig somewhere there is something up with Boehly, but the truth is, digging on anyone in top level football will reveal something...
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
The punishment that needs to be considered is the owners forced to sell.

They may have once 'passed' the fit and proper owners test but how could they now?

They've run roughshod over the league and it's rules and have shown zero accountability or cooperation.

They simply shouldn't be welcome anymore.
Click to expand...

The fit and proper owners test apparently is only possible when someone buys a club, not when they already own it.

From the outside, with limited knowledge of what's actually going on, the fit and proper owners test mostly seems to overstate what actually goes on. As long as you have the money you claim to have and isn't currently being accused of genocide you're mostly going to pass.
 
scaramanga said:
The punishment needs to be enough that others won't just follow suit.

If it's a one-off points deduction that falls well short of serious damage to the club then the sensible thing for Saudi Sportswashing Machine to do is spend a couple of £bn, take one difficult season and then win the league.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And if the process ends with multiple, clear and fairly serious breaches of the regulations I think it would be farcical if there isn't a punishment that would work as a deterrent. What's the point of having the regulations in that case?

But let's see what happens. City are contesting the allegations and there may be issues with proving wrongdoing if there have been serious breaches.
 
braineclipse said:
The fit and proper owners test apparently is only possible when someone buys a club, not when they already own it.

From the outside, with limited knowledge of what's actually going on, the fit and proper owners test mostly seems to overstate what actually goes on. As long as you have the money you claim to have and isn't currently being accused of genocide you're mostly going to pass.
Click to expand...

I think one of the recommendations from the government led review was that the fit and proper persons test be re-run from time to time. Can’t recall the specifics. But it’s difficult to see how that could work in practice as if a previously approved owner then fails the re-test the only real options I can see are a time period in which whatever is the issue can be remedied and if it can’t be, a new owner to be found, or suspension from the league pending either remedy or new owner. Any of which feel open to legal challenge and would likely lower the potential value of any sale.
I think this particular recommendation may be aimed more at the EFL than the PL though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back