• 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

Naughty Emirates Marketing Project - Spot of Compo??

Perhaps that number (60 point reduction) was put out as a conversational kite to determine what would satiate the baying mob.

It would relegate them. It’s a big deal but I don’t pretend to know if that is sufficient to rein them back into adhering to the spirit of the rules.

And the Championship then has the problem of ensuring they are operating fairly, but to my mind that is a PL prerequisite.
 
johnaliola said:
Perhaps that number (60 point reduction) was put out as a conversational kite to determine what would satiate the baying mob.

It would relegate them. It’s a big deal but I don’t pretend to know if that is sufficient to rein them back into adhering to the spirit of the rules.

And the Championship then has the problem of ensuring they are operating fairly, but to my mind that is a PL prerequisite.
Click to expand...

It's an independent panel made up of kings council. The premier league are not the ones deciding the punishment. Although they have rules saying what possible punishments there could be.
The kc's don't need to satiate a baying mob. Just as a judge makes their own decision on punishment in a criminal case. Not parliament. But within the parameters of what parliament sets out.
 
On the basis of Everton getting docked 6 points for one single pretty minor financial rule breaking, City should get docked about 600 points. 60 points for 10 consecutive seasons.

That won't happen of course. Regardless, 60 points is way to lenient. It has to be in combination of a gigantic fine and several years transfer ban at a minimum!
 
Kandi1977 said:
On the basis of Everton getting docked 6 points for one single pretty minor financial rule breaking, City should get docked about 600 points. 60 points for 10 consecutive seasons.

That won't happen of course. Regardless, 60 points is way to lenient. It has to be in combination of a gigantic fine and several years transfer ban at a minimum!
Click to expand...

I think just banning from the EPL (and European qualification through English places) for 9 years. Then it's up to them if they want to join the Championship, SPL, UAE league or wherever.
 
Part of me wants the UEFA ban to be the biggest thing. If they get a 5 year UEFA ban then that hits their revenues massively and more importantly makes them much less attractive to incoming players. I also want to see the ruling that sponsorship income needs to be direct from the legal entity (of the sponsor) and any money from owners is treated as capital investment and treated accordingly. I don't actually know what has happened with these payments in the period (2019-2026) with these payments and whether there can be further investigations into the next period.

If the FA/PL and UEFA collaborate and think about this intelligently then they could really right some wrongs in football. they need to work together though, and UEFA need to heed advice from the UK rather than lording it up over us like they normally do.
 
Lilbaz said:
It's an independent panel made up of kings council. The premier league are not the ones deciding the punishment. Although they have rules saying what possible punishments there could be.
The kc's don't need to satiate a baying mob. Just as a judge makes their own decision on punishment in a criminal case. Not parliament. But within the parameters of what parliament sets out.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about criminal offences just the outcome of the PL charges who are the body who will be applying points deductions.

I don’t see how the appointed KC’s can establish what is a fair and proportionate punishment when there are no published tariffs in the PL rules- it will have to be consulted upon surely?
 
johnaliola said:
I’m not talking about criminal offences just the outcome of the PL charges who are the body who will be applying points deductions.

I don’t see how the appointed KC’s can establish what is a fair and proportionate punishment when there are no published tariffs in the PL rules- it will have to be consulted upon surely?
Click to expand...

If its British judges and KC's wont they have to wait for a medical report of the defendants before passing sentence?
 
johnaliola said:
I’m not talking about criminal offences just the outcome of the PL charges who are the body who will be applying points deductions.

I don’t see how the appointed KC’s can establish what is a fair and proportionate punishment when there are no published tariffs in the PL rules- it will have to be consulted upon surely?
Click to expand...

It's an independet panel that hear the case and say what the punishment is. The prem just enforces their decision.
The independent panel was made up of 3 kc's.
PL Rule W.64 outlines possible punishments. Older case punishments will also set precedent for what is fair and proportionate.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Ian Holloway telling it like it is! And I agree!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Click to expand...

My only concern is the forcing them to sell, it will be tough to sell that on imo and I can see the new owners doing a Chelsea and using the new ownership as an excuse to water down the punishment.
Whoever buys it will need to honour the contracts, you can't do that on first division revenues.
 
glasgowspur said:
My only concern is the forcing them to sell, it will be tough to sell that on imo and I can see the new owners doing a Chelsea and using the new ownership as an excuse to water down the punishment.
Whoever buys it will need to honour the contracts, you can't do that on first division revenues.
Click to expand...

so no one buys it, it is forced to stop trading, contracts are null and void and everything goes in a fire sale. happy days.
 
glasgowspur said:
My only concern is the forcing them to sell, it will be tough to sell that on imo and I can see the new owners doing a Chelsea and using the new ownership as an excuse to water down the punishment.
Whoever buys it will need to honour the contracts, you can't do that on first division revenues.
Click to expand...

Isn't a different situation? It's been reported the current Chelsea owners bought misdemeanours to the league, anyone buying City would have full knowledge what has gone on before and have to accept the consequences. If you buy known stolen goods you can still get nicked for handling.
 
Lost Mango said:
so no one buys it, it is forced to stop trading, contracts are null and void and everything goes in a fire sale. happy days.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately the ones to suffer then is the fans, and that is not something I would ever want to any club.

City rightly deserve to be punished, and should be imo relegated. Even European ban for a period feels fair but beyond that, just no as much as the saudi's own the club to quote Daniel Levy they are just custodians of it. The fans of Emirates Marketing Project should not see their club come to the point of non-existance and to be honest I will miss the games, the only 6 points we could guarantee every season.
 
demotw said:
Unfortunately the ones to suffer then is the fans, and that is not something I would ever want to any club.

City rightly deserve to be punished, and should be imo relegated. Even European ban for a period feels fair but beyond that, just no as much as the saudi's own the club to quote Daniel Levy they are just custodians of it. The fans of Emirates Marketing Project should not see their club come to the point of non-existance and to be honest I will miss the games, the only 6 points we could guarantee every season.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but there have been many clubs that have been mismanaged and gone to the wall in the past.
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
Isn't a different situation? It's been reported the current Chelsea owners bought misdemeanours to the league, anyone buying City would have full knowledge what has gone on before and have to accept the consequences. If you buy known stolen goods you can still get nicked for handling.
Click to expand...

Everyone knew Chelsea were fiddling the books as well, it was just convenient to get it out of the way under the guise of new owners.
Potential new city owners can say, yes would like to buy it, however those punishments make it difficult, let's negotiate.
Not wanting to damage the brand by having a serial "champion" relegated I can see the PL wilting and handing out weaker punishment.
 
demotw said:
Unfortunately the ones to suffer then is the fans, and that is not something I would ever want to any club.

City rightly deserve to be punished, and should be imo relegated. Even European ban for a period feels fair but beyond that, just no as much as the saudi's own the club to quote Daniel Levy they are just custodians of it. The fans of Emirates Marketing Project should not see their club come to the point of non-existance and to be honest I will miss the games, the only 6 points we could guarantee every season.
Click to expand...

No one stood up for the fans of Bury or Macclesfield. And their clubs' crimes were far less (just not being able to pay the bills).

They'll eventually come back and find their natural level (mid-table EPL), just like Rangers and Juventus did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back