I understand but I'm trying to plough through the quagmire of accusations with a lack of genuine inormation at the moment. It's like trying to knit spaghetti.jamesedwards wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 7:14 pmCapture 38.PNGgreenmark wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:54 pmA lot of the accusations against city are around refusal to provide info that they are obliged to. They are playing a game of chicken with the EPL.jamesedwards wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 6:43 pm
Not really. Forest and Everton have breached FFP loss limits, whereas Man City have not.
The accusation is that they used underhand accounting manipulation to stay under limit, which they deny. This needs to be proved before guilt can be determined.
Incidentally none of these rules existed when the rest of the Premiership juggernauts splashed the cash to buy their success. They created them to try and prevent others from competing.
All they need to do is provide the info that the EPL require and the charges would fall away. The reluctance to provide the info suggests they are as guilty as a puppy next to a pile of poo.
I'll get back to you if I come to an understanding of what City have been accused of precisely, rather than internet biased summarys.
Jeez. If someone was accused of murder the charge would be clear. The details of the evidence would be sub judice unless expressed in court.
But EPL rule B.13 or C.71. Does that mean anything at all to anyone?
B.13 made a rude gesture towards an EPL board member.
C.71 refused to disclose information regarding the acquisition of a player.
Anyhow. Will get back to you if I form an informed view.