You would think so and so far the independent commission has gone for points deductions as the only punishment that the clubs understand .
I think they can, just not fast track immediately in the same season. The EFL and PL have used an arrangement in the past to pass on sanctions for clubs, but the fast track rules implemented this season were after Leicester were relegated.
All part of Levy’s master plan for negotiations this summer: “take my first offer or you’ll end up getting points deducted like Everton & Forest”.
It took the PL nearly five years to get together the evidence to charge City. It's going to take a long time for the Independent Commission to sift through the evidence to decide whether City are guilty or not, many will say we know they are guilty but the commission as in a court of law have to be satisfied that the evidence proves that beyond doubt.
You answered your own question. It's far more complex than what Everton and Forest have been charged for.
If this were a thing, every time a company did something shady and was facing consequences you'd see a change of ownership and they'd all just walk away as if nothing happened.
Up to you to do your due diligence when making the purchase. Personal liability for directors etc is different, but corporate offences survive a change of ownership and quite rightly so. As trix says above, otherwise companies would change owners every time they were accused of wrongdoing.
That's true but not sure Chelsea will be punished in the way that most people want to see.
This isn’t true, beyond reasonable doubt is a criminal law standard, civil courts for instance have a lower standard (balance of probabilities) for instance. FFP rules actually require clubs to prove sponsorship deals are fair commercial value, not sure what the burden of proof is for losses
Yes criminal and civil law are on different levels but the commission will still need a degree of proof to find City guilty, a piece from the UEFA Man City CAS tribunal held under Swiss Law.
Getting bored of people saying this now. City have been charged.
www.bbc.co.uk
2 things - 1) you said ‘beyond doubt’ which is very different to ‘comfortably satisfied’ in the ruling you are quoting. 2) the premier league has wider discretion than uefa and different burdens of proof. Indeed uefa are no longer able to investigate city’s alleged offences due to statute of limitations whereas the PL can go back as far as it likes.
www.theguardian.com
