PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[projectriver]

Doesn’t that surely depend on the scope of the LBA? Surely a claimant can choose to limit what defamatory output they seek to control. If he had to remove everything from his back catalogue about City, then the optics would not be great for the club, especially given the backstory. Far better for him to see the error of his ways. And what’s the fucking point of deleting anything these days? It will be out there anyway.

Of course, but this video was 2 weeks ago and close to the bone. I’d suggest if even that isn’t deleted then he’s not had any correspondence. And if deletion wasn’t requested then it would undermine any case that the party believed they had been libelled by that video

 

[christened at st marks]

Keith Wyness letter please

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

 

[Coatigan]

Clearly had a letter, that little nervous laugh he did when mentioning legal matters gives it away. Never doubt Tolmie.

You see a nervous laugh, I see a flippant one. I don't think it is enough to run away with.

Anyway, I've already said what I feel is enough on it in its other thread, but I do feel the reading into it is loose.

 

[Bluesince1979]

View attachment 117105

There must surely be a full investigation as to how these charges came to be made and why if, no WHEN, it is all cleared

 

[BlueBrain]

View attachment 117105

I thought the hearing hasn’t even happened yet?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Of course, but this video was 2 weeks ago and close to the bone. I’d suggest if even that isn’t deleted then he’s not had any correspondence. And if deletion wasn’t requested then it would undermine any case that the party believed they had been libelled by that video

Yes that’s fair comment. Depends what the club’s endgame is, I suppose. I expect they would be content if the noises just stopped as of now, rather than cancelling what’s been said previously. The club will likely have no intention to litigate in relation to any defamation, unless forced to, as the optics of a claim against this fraud wouldn’t look great for the club, and so they are managing their approach accordingly. So undermining any subsequent claim won’t be a principal consideration for the club, as they will only pursue that as a last resort, and they may very well believe he can be brought to heel without resorting to that.

There has to be some explanation for his change in script - and some correspondence/communication from the club seems the most likely to me, but I’m all ears as to alternatives!

 

[langy]

View attachment 117105

Yea just read that on Facebook

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

There must surely be a full investigation as to how these charges came to be made and why if, no WHEN, it is all cleared

How much energy has the Premier League expanded since February 2020 until now in trying to go after City on behalf of their other stakeholders who play in red, because if they don’t they will go off an join the Super League?

They are in the process of ruining their product and weakening English football to go after one team. No wonder they are so against an independent commission as this will have to ask that question.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

I thought the hearing hasn’t even happened yet?

There will be arguments put forward from both sides pre-hearing to decide what’s relevant and what’s not. Maybe they’ve looked at it all and told the Premier League they are wasting a lot of people’s time here.