The only problem if that banner is in the south stand it is easy for the cameras to avoid it. I do realise it would be the 1894 lads doing it but for effect and wider viewing it needs to be in the East stand.This would be a good time for 1894 to put a massive banner together, in the style of those ultras things, like the one they did about UEFA, stating that FPP is to close the door on competition or something. It would get media coverage and state the club's case well. Arsenal would have been perfect. I'd contribute.
"FPP - Damaging the Many to Protect the Few" or "FPP - Closing The Drawbridge" with the badges of Liverpool and Arsenal in it os summat like that.
That's a letter not an article. Still insane mindtheres an article floating about this morning saying we should have a 690 point deduction and be relegated, but heres the kicker when we get back in to the prem each time we start on negative 690 points so you start the season already relegated and then work the points off......
Crazy how much people are desperate for city to be found guilty. It really does show mob mentality is not just in person but is digital too.
The biggest negative for the PL case against Mancini is that his consultancy contract started while he was Inter manager and before City had been taken over, then was amalgamated on our books purely so this type of speculation couldn't occur. They only know about it because we told them we're doing it.
Proving that City used a contract signed before Sheikh Mansour owned City as a renumeration for a management contract for Mancini, in the years before FFP was even a thing, and during the time that City lost £197m is going to take some doing. Good luck to them.
Dare I mention the usual rule…He's too busy watching his wife get her back doors smashed in by every single patron of the Bishop Blaize. The sad, cuck ****.
Errrrrrrrr :)I also think that if we do beat all the charges, we do a 115 countdown animation on the big screens like we did mocking the rags banner when we won the first PL title
Great minds think alike :)I hope when/if we’re cleared, the club run the same graphic on the Etihad screens it did when Agueroooooo happened, but with the counter running down from 115 to zero.
The one difficulty we have with the original contract with Al Jazeera is that it was drawn up by Pearce and other City execs. PL could claim we already had the details.It was part of the regs that we had to send in Mancini's contract to the Premier League secretary. The contract with Al Jazeera (sp?) would have been irrelevant then (except the De Spiegal leaks suggested City paid that or something).
It's actually now the rule that we also have to provide details of any payments made to the manager from anyone else as well (P.7.3 in this years handbook)
Here's a screenshot of the rules we breached in the first 2 Mancini seasons. The rule the following year was the same just in section P.
View attachment 111654
The 22/23 rulebook when we were charged does have the rule that we have to list other payments made to the manager by other parties. Maybe they are using that criteria to charge us for not giving details of Mancini's other contract. OR they are alleging the other contract was a way to pay Mancini more whilst declaring less (although no one has provided a good reason why we would do that) OR they are saying we never sent them Mancinis contract OR they are saying we sent something in but it wasn't the contract under which Mancini was working
Alternatively Im an idiot and all this theory is false
When the extension is built we need a 115 suite!I hope when/if we’re cleared, the club run the same graphic on the Etihad screens it did when Agueroooooo happened, but with the counter running down from 115 to zero.
Are all the details reference emails, manager's contracts ,various other details about who did what and why,freely available for scrutiny or have some of our cleverer members hacked City's database.The one difficulty we have with the original contract with Al Jazeera is that it was drawn up by Pearce and other City execs. PL could claim we already had the details.
The one difficulty we have with the original contract with Al Jazeera is that it was drawn up by Pearce and other City execs. PL could claim we already had the details.