6 + 2 Point Deductions

[arch stanton]

In accordance with Premier League Rule W.82.1, the Premier League confirms that it has today referred a number of alleged breaches of the Premier League Rules by Manchester City Football Club (Club) to a Commission under Premier League Rule W.3.4.
Details of the Premier League Rules that the Club is alleged to have breached are as follows:

1. In respect of each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those seasons that required provision by a member club to the Premier League, in the utmost good faith, of accurate financial information that gives a true and fair view of the club’s financial position, in particular with respect to its revenue (including sponsorship revenue), its related parties and its operating costs, namely:
(a) for Season 2009/10, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72 and C.75 (from 10 September 2009, Premier League Rules B.13, C.71, C.72, C.79 and C.80);
(b) for Season 2010/11, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(c) for Season 2011/12, Premier League Rules B.13, C.78, C.79, C.86 and C.87;
(d) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11 and E.12;
(e) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rules B.15, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.49;
(f) for Season 2014/15, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(g) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.50;
(h) for Season 2016/17, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51; and
(i) for Season 2017/18, Premier League Rules B.16, E.3, E.4, E.11, E.12 and E.51.

2. In respect of:
(a) each of Seasons 2009/10 to 2012/13 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of manager remuneration in its relevant contracts with its manager, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2009/10 to 2011/12 inclusive, Premier League Rules Q.7 and Q.8; and
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules P.7 and P.8; and
(b) each of Seasons 2010/11 to 2015/16 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to include full details of player remuneration in its relevant contracts with its players, namely:
(1) for Seasons 2010/11 and 2011/12, Premier League Rules K.12 and K.20;
(2) for Season 2012/13, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.20;
(3) for Seasons 2013/14 and 2014/15, Premier League Rules T.12 and T.19; and
(4) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules T.13 and T.20.

3. In respect of each of Seasons 2013/14 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons requiring a member club to comply with UEFA’s regulations, including UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations, namely:
(a) for Season 2013/14, Premier League Rule B.14.6; and
(b) for Seasons 2014/15 to 2017/18 inclusive, Premier League Rule B.15.6.

4. In respect of each of the Seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18 inclusive, the Premier League Rules applicable in those Seasons on Profitability and Sustainability, namely:
(a) for Season 2015/16, Premier League Rules E.52 to E.60; and
(b) for Seasons 2016/17 and 2017/18, Premier League Rules E.53 to E.60.

5. In respect of the period from December 2018 to date, the Premier League Rules applicable in the relevant Seasons requiring a member club to cooperate with, and assist, the Premier League in its investigations, including by providing documents and information to the Premier League in the utmost good faith, namely:
(a) for Season 2018/19, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(b) for Season 2019/20, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(c) for Season 2020/21, Premier League Rules B.16, B.19, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13;
(d) for Season 2021/22, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.12 and W.13; and
(e) for Season 2022/23, Premier League Rules B.15, B.18, W.1, W.2, W.15 and W.16.
Commissions are independent of the Premier League and member clubs. The members of the Commission will be appointed by the independent Chair of the Premier League Judicial Panel, in accordance with Premier League Rules W.19, W.20 and W.26.
The proceedings before the Commission will, in accordance with Premier League Rule W.82, be confidential and heard in private. Under Premier League Rule W.82.2, the Commission’s final award will be published on the Premier League’s website.
This confirmation is made in accordance with Premier League Rule W.82.1. The Premier League will be making no further comment in respect of this matter until further notice.

​

And some people wonder why this is taking longer than ours.

because they have Stephen Bradshaw as the lead investigator?

 

[Dymak]

That was a verdict for violating European Union laws. You told the EU to feck off, remember?

My understanding is that legal precedent from the EU continues to have relevance in UEFA governed competitions like the Premier League.

I think the PL’s document that details Everton’s punishment makes reference to precedent from within European football, and I think the recent ESL judgement is applicable to UK clubs?

 

[Goat]

My understanding is that legal precedent from the EU continues to have relevance in UEFA governed competitions like the Premier League.

I think the PL’s document that details Everton’s punishment makes reference to precedent from within European football, and I think the recent ESL judgement is applicable to UK clubs?

What about the Premier League?​

Even if a revised European Super League does get the green light, it appears as if Premier League clubs will still be unable to join. The UK is no longer bound by EU law since Brexit and the UK government’s Department of Culture, Media & Sport released a statement that indicated a bill about to pass into law, which sets up a new independent football regulator, would stop English clubs signing up for a breakaway competition.

“The attempt to create a breakaway competition was a defining moment in English football and was universally condemned by fans, clubs and the Government,” said a DCMS spokesperson.

“We took decisive action at the time by triggering the fan-led review of football governance, which called for the creation of a new independent regulator for English football. We will shortly be bringing forward legislation that makes this a reality, and will stop clubs from joining any similar breakaway competitions in the future.”


Jade-Alexandra Fearns, partner at Paul Hastings:

“Today’s verdict from the ECJ is a watershed moment for the future of inter-club football projects. The ruling essentially finds that FIFA and UEFA have abused their dominant position by blocking the creation of the European Super League and sanctioning the clubs involved, completely contrary to EU competition law.

“Today’s ruling clearly states that this is unlawful, and will beg further questions in the future as the all encompassing roles of FIFA and UEFA. They play all major roles – governing body, regulator, commercial operator as well as having sanctioning powers for any breaches, and it has allowed them to act as judge, jury and executioner.

“The verdict also finds that UEFA and FIFA rules relating to the exploitation of media rights are such as to be harmful by European clubs, companies operating in media markets, and TV viewers, by preventing them from enjoying new and innovative competitors.

“Ultimately, it’s a huge day for those behind the Super League, and paves the way for those who may want to set up competing tournaments in the future. However, it’s important to keep in mind that this judgment does not necessarily equal smooth sailing for the Super League, as many individual Premier League and national clubs have had their charters amended since 2021 to prohibit involvement in such competitions.

“Following Brexit, the UK is also not obliged to follow the ruling, and could still feasibly prevent Premier League clubs from joining the Super League.”

 

[Dymak]

What about the Premier League?​

Even if a revised European Super League does get the green light, it appears as if Premier League clubs will still be unable to join. The UK is no longer bound by EU law since Brexit and the UK government’s Department of Culture, Media & Sport released a statement that indicated a bill about to pass into law, which sets up a new independent football regulator, would stop English clubs signing up for a breakaway competition.

“The attempt to create a breakaway competition was a defining moment in English football and was universally condemned by fans, clubs and the Government,” said a DCMS spokesperson.

“We took decisive action at the time by triggering the fan-led review of football governance, which called for the creation of a new independent regulator for English football. We will shortly be bringing forward legislation that makes this a reality, and will stop clubs from joining any similar breakaway competitions in the future.”


Jade-Alexandra Fearns, partner at Paul Hastings:

“Today’s verdict from the ECJ is a watershed moment for the future of inter-club football projects. The ruling essentially finds that FIFA and UEFA have abused their dominant position by blocking the creation of the European Super League and sanctioning the clubs involved, completely contrary to EU competition law.

“Today’s ruling clearly states that this is unlawful, and will beg further questions in the future as the all encompassing roles of FIFA and UEFA. They play all major roles – governing body, regulator, commercial operator as well as having sanctioning powers for any breaches, and it has allowed them to act as judge, jury and executioner.

“The verdict also finds that UEFA and FIFA rules relating to the exploitation of media rights are such as to be harmful by European clubs, companies operating in media markets, and TV viewers, by preventing them from enjoying new and innovative competitors.

“Ultimately, it’s a huge day for those behind the Super League, and paves the way for those who may want to set up competing tournaments in the future. However, it’s important to keep in mind that this judgment does not necessarily equal smooth sailing for the Super League, as many individual Premier League and national clubs have had their charters amended since 2021 to prohibit involvement in such competitions.

“Following Brexit, the UK is also not obliged to follow the ruling, and could still feasibly prevent Premier League clubs from joining the Super League.”

Aye, UK companies arent obliged to abide by EU law, but I'm not sure it follows that precedent from European courts or European football authorities can be dismissed as irrelevant to the governance of English football? Not when you are a sports club operating within a framework of European football governed by a European authority (UEFA).

This FFP punishment and the appeal is also fairly novel, at least in the Premier League. There is a distinct lack of precedent, and people will have to look at different leagues and possibly different jurisdictions if they want to discuss precedent for FFP breaches and sporting punishments under the governance of UEFA.

Google informs me that I'm harping on about something called Persuasive Precedent.

 

[Goat]

Aye, UK companies arent obliged to abide by EU law, but I'm not sure it follows that precedent from European courts or European football authorities can be dismissed as irrelevant to the governance of English football? Not when you are a sports club operating within a framework of European football governed by a European authority (UEFA).

This FFP punishment and the appeal is also fairly novel, at least in the Premier League. There is a distinct lack of precedent, and people will have to look at different leagues and possibly different jurisdictions if they want to discuss precedent for FFP breaches and sporting punishments under the governance of UEFA.

Google informs me that I'm harping on about something called Persuasive Precedent.

Well according to the Premier League website.

The Premier League is a private company wholly owned by its 20 Member Clubs who make up the League at any one time.

Each individual club is independent, working within the rules of football, as defined by the Premier League, The FA, UEFA and FIFA, as well as being subject to English and European law.


But I saw nothing in the ESL judgement or the commission report that suggests it will be a factor in our case.

Our case is without precedent.

Nobody has ever breached these rules.



I really would think any brief worth his salt could argue that the punishment is unjust and does not fit the "crime".

 

[Dixieslaces]

I thought Everton just say can “we’ve appealed” then wait an outcome so it is like a jury and he’s are solicitor? Don’t get or mate

You ok Matty?

 

[Dymak]

Well according to the Premier League website.

The Premier League is a private company wholly owned by its 20 Member Clubs who make up the League at any one time.

Each individual club is independent, working within the rules of football, as defined by the Premier League, The FA, UEFA and FIFA, as well as being subject to English and European law.


But I saw nothing in the ESL judgement or the commission report that suggests it will be a factor in our case.

Our case is without precedent.

Nobody has ever breached these rules.



I really would think any brief worth his salt could argue that the punishment is unjust and does not fit the "crime".

So the PL’s website continues to refer to European law when discussing rules and governance.

I think there is some precedent. UEFA have fined many clubs for FFP breaches. There have also been FFP sanctions within the football league, which were definitely referred to within the commission’s report. It mentions Sheffield Wednesday, who I think had their points deduction halved following appeal.

I agree about it being unjust, and there’s also been a lack of transparency, with the whole process being murky and unclear with many parties (including the Premier League) appearing confused and unsure about the process.

The ESL ruling says that sanctions must be governed by criteria that is transparent, objective, precise, non-discriminatory, and proportionate. A successful lawyer will able to demonstrate how the PL’s sanctions against Everton were none of those things.

I don’t think the PL will be able to ignore this ruling “coz Brexit”, and it will at the very least be relevant to the proceedings, even if the ruling may not be 100% binding in the UK.

 

[ashwuk76]

Seems like the new football regulator will be based in Manchester...perfect place for City

 

[helpimonfire]

Can we have our points back
Please

 

[Wat Tyler]

Newcastle:

"Although the club’s latest accounts revealed a loss of £155m over the past three seasons – ostensibly in excess of the £105m PSR limit – it is understood that money invested in the women’s team, charity foundation and academy can be removed from the deficit, leaving Newcastle on the right side of the law."


How is that different from us with the stadium?

 

[Toffeeslam]

Newcastle:

"Although the club’s latest accounts revealed a loss of £155m over the past three seasons – ostensibly in excess of the £105m PSR limit – it is understood that money invested in the women’s team, charity foundation and academy can be removed from the deficit, leaving Newcastle on the right side of the law."


How is that different from us with the stadium?

It was till. They changed the rules to get at us

 

[JLW]

Newcastle:

"Although the club’s latest accounts revealed a loss of £155m over the past three seasons – ostensibly in excess of the £105m PSR limit – it is understood that money invested in the women’s team, charity foundation and academy can be removed from the deficit, leaving Newcastle on the right side of the law."


How is that different from us with the stadium?

It’s not they’re just using different excuses

 

[Bez2k2k]

Newcastle:

"Although the club’s latest accounts revealed a loss of £155m over the past three seasons – ostensibly in excess of the £105m PSR limit – it is understood that money invested in the women’s team, charity foundation and academy can be removed from the deficit, leaving Newcastle on the right side of the law."


How is that different from us with the stadium?

Because we did all of those things aswell and then claimed money for the stadium which in fact we didn’t use for the stadium, we used for everyday running of the business. Moshiri paid for the stadium using his own funds which meant we had to declare it, thus not making the stadium costs eligible for our profit and loss. And he’s an accountant, go figure.

 

[perth_blue]

P&S deadline day is going to be more entertaining than transfer deadline day.

 

[Moggers]

P&S deadline day is going to be more entertaining than transfer deadline day.

Jim Whites new gig