PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Sir peace frog]

if city wins cl what article will come out then i wonder

ill be too drunk to read it.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Plenty of guilty people who maintain their innocence as well to be fair.

OJ likes this post!

 

[halfcenturyup]

You're right- typically you can't retrospectively apply a rule. What would be alarming is if what city are claiming is true, how the PL legal team thought that it was ok to do so

Well yes, but I can't imagine they have made that mistake. It's probably more nuanced than a newspaper can get its head around and part of a 'you sue me and I will make you pay" strategy. along with the Arsenal KC issue. Tie them up with legalities as much as you can to make them regret even starting the process.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

Would really like to see this finished up, once and for all.
Its really taking away the enjoyment of what is a great time for us.
Constant sniping and innuendo.
Any praise ends with a "but...."

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Talk about picking a perfect, perfect time to do so.

 

[bmfc95]

Well yes, but I can't imagine they have made that mistake. It's probably more nuanced than a newspaper can get its head around and part of a 'you sue me and I will make you pay" strategy. along with the Arsenal KC issue. Tie them up with legalities as much as you can to make them regret even starting the process.

You'd think so (and hope so) but these are the same people who put the wrong charges on their website when they went public with the case and had to correct themselves

 

[SWP's back]

well then

I thought we were told by legal eagles on here that him being an arsenal club member meant fuck all as their professional obligations are sacrosanct and they wouldn’t let bias get in the way? Seems the club may not agree.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Having read it, it's a fluff piece, piggyback on last night.

Probably had it in the can for a few days.

Basically us challenging the legality of when some many of the charges can even be considered.

I sense everything up to 2018 is being argued as not applicable due to the rule changes.

Would also explain why we changed our image rights vehicle from 2018.

The Arsenal barrister is just a headline.

As long as it looks like we’re almost admitting we’re guilty and looking for ways out, Ziegler will be thinking ‘job done’ and him, Miggsy and Panjandrum can have a good old WhatsApp group love in……..

 

[oldius]

You have to defend yourself in entirety - enough is enough.

 

[SWP's back]

But if we are as innocent as we say we are and have the evidence to prove it then why worry who judges the case?

Well that’s naïveté right there.

 

[Centurions]

In my humble opinion they (that is the old cartel clubs) could see this day coming it matters little that most of the charges will be withdrawn and if they find us guilty of anything it will be a procedural error and a small fine

However I have never believed this was about this, it is an attempt to tarnish the clubs name, and creating a narrative that we are cheats you can read some of the media cheerleaders implying this right now, you only have to read another football foru and they are spouting the same thing, your average fan believes what he want's to believe, the truth does not come in to it

I've never been one to curtail press freedom, but this is not about free speech it's a tactic employed to tarnish the club and prevent City taking a bigger market share (fans from overseas are notoriously fickle) I hope that the club come out fighting

Spot on, you only have to read some of the replies to see the bitterness come out. The amount of disinformation and flat out wrong statements beggars belief. Total waste of time trying to correct them as you really can't teach stupid.

 

[Newman Noggs]

You use everything you have in your locker.

And you also do it in real time. It would be nonsense to wait until a verdict is delivered and then start challenging aspects of the process.

 

[give it to gordon]

Am I understanding this correctly ? The pl want to charge us for breaks rules that didnt exist ?

 

[MCFC1993]

Seems like Stefan is saying the Premier League are trying to use new rules to request information retrospectively. He admits he's just guessing but I can understand why the club is pushing back on that.

Click see more to see his full tweet.


Hoping this pans out as we can't charge City because they aren't obliged to hand over information and we can all move on.

 

[SWP's back]

Being a FOC dose this mean the FA Are shiting it

No and also, the FA aren’t a party in the dispute.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Talk about picking a perfect, perfect time to do so.

Yep, on our timeline, having just shown the world how to play football.

 

[mike1923]

if city wins cl what article will come out then i wonder

Man City win the CL but new reports suggest their owners are directly responsible for the conflict in Ukraine. And rising energy costs

 

[give it to gordon]

Seems like Stefan is saying the Premier League are trying to use new rules to request information retrospectively. He admits he's just guessing but I can understand why the club is pushing back on that.

Click see more to see his full tweet.


Hoping this pans out as we can't charge City because they aren't obliged to hand over information and we can all move on.

Surely the pl have all the information they need hence the charges

 

[SWP's back]

Surely the pl have are the information they need hence the charges

The majority of charges are failing to disclose information, repeated on a yearly basis.

 

[blue ranger]

So did we challenge Rosen’s appointment in light of this club allegiance factor - which I must confess I’d never heard of - or because of our interactions with him in the intervening 3 months. Can’t say it fills me with glad tidings given our claims to have irrefutable evidence

Agree with you. If we have irrefutable evidence surely it doesn’t matter who it is.