halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 9,585
I'd love to see your sums on that
I'd love to see your sums on that
Fucking Hell have a day off.If ( and a big if ) we are found guilty then the repercussions will cost CFG billions in lost asset value and revenue. Just think the financial commitment to the new stand will be small in consideration in the big picture and the hotel is more linked to the opening of arena than the stadium
Agree it is a good sign of confidence though - although I’m sure it would have gone ahead regardless of confidence.
The definition of fraud isA couple of things that keep getting raised that we should put the lid on once and for all.
Firstly, the word fraud isn't used in the allegations because this is a case of breach of contract. The contract between the PL and the club doesn't refer to fraud, so the allegations carefully (eventually) refer to the rules in the contract that were breached. The combination of rule breaches may effectively represent fraud but the absense of the word in the PL statement means nothing and implies nothing.
Secondly, there is no legal requirement, other than in a regulated industry, to report fraud to the authorities. The fact that the PL hasn't referred the club to the SFO, for example, means nothing and implies nothing.
I re read your post and at first I thought you where say the word fraud was not used because it was not fraud but I see that you say the word fraud is not used because it’s about breach of contract but why have they chickened out of using the word fraud ?A couple of things that keep getting raised that we should put the lid on once and for all.
Firstly, the word fraud isn't used in the allegations because this is a case of breach of contract. The contract between the PL and the club doesn't refer to fraud, so the allegations carefully (eventually) refer to the rules in the contract that were breached. The combination of rule breaches may effectively represent fraud but the absense of the word in the PL statement means nothing and implies nothing.
Secondly, there is no legal requirement, other than in a regulated industry, to report fraud to the authorities. The fact that the PL hasn't referred the club to the SFO, for example, means nothing and implies nothing.
This is really the only explanation, imo, why they are continuing. They started the investigation, found some things that needed explanation but the club didn't provide the proof to support the explanations because they aren't required by the PL rules, or by UK law so to do, it being information held externally. So what do the PL do? Finish the investigation without a proper conclusion, which is a terrible situation for a governing body? Or continue with the disciplinary process, incur huge legal fees, and then "lose" the case, which is a terrible situation for a governing body.
The club has stitched the PL up good and proper over this, I think. We really have some clever people running the club.
you are a legal man - are you telling me that PL would have proceeded the way they have even if they were advised their case wasn’t strong enough ?
Four years to build a case and they went ahead even if advised what they have is not strong enough ?
That’s my reading of it & the charges are spiteful punishment for not falling in line. The correct conclusion would have been we’ve exhausted all avenues open to us & there is no was nothing untoward found.
That’s a win fucking win & I can’t believe Masters didn’t consider it,
The last few pages is being dominated by the usual suspect with very apt username.
FFS.
They may not use the word fraud,but that is what the allegations imply,however you wish to dress it up.A couple of things that keep getting raised that we should put the lid on once and for all.
Firstly, the word fraud isn't used in the allegations because this is a case of breach of contract. The contract between the PL and the club doesn't refer to fraud, so the allegations carefully (eventually) refer to the rules in the contract that were breached. The combination of rule breaches may effectively represent fraud but the absense of the word in the PL statement means nothing and implies nothing.
Secondly, there is no legal requirement, other than in a regulated industry, to report fraud to the authorities. The fact that the PL hasn't referred the club to the SFO, for example, means nothing and implies nothing.