TBC I’m not against, I’m just saying that the evidence will be the audited accounts/ bank statements.I’ll side with the club mate that’s all I’m saying
I just don’t see what else we could provide that would be considered irrefutable evidence.
TBC I’m not against, I’m just saying that the evidence will be the audited accounts/ bank statements.I’ll side with the club mate that’s all I’m saying
We all call our evidence “irrefutable” to sound bullish. Even when it isn’t. In fact it always isnt.I keep going back to the club statement- irrefutable evidence.
Believe me, I would be so honoured to hear this belted out at Brentford.Lol, Brilliant, but it needs to be sung accompanied by the dance as well......just to piss em off more.
Witness statements, eg when the CEO and Chairman of Etihad Airways swore under oath in a Swiss court(CAS) that the sponsorship of MCFC by the airline had been fully authorised by him alone and that it had proved to be of excellent commercial value, in fact it had exceeded all of the airlines expectations. The court agreed his evidence was irrefutable.TBC I’m not against, I’m just saying that the evidence will be the audited accounts/ bank statements.
I just don’t see what else we could provide that would be considered irrefutable evidence.
I reckon its the butler that did itSounds like beyond a reasonable doubt to me.
Pity it’s not a real court.
Haven’t a Cluedo?I reckon its the butler that did it
You haven't got a monopoly on bad punsHaven’t a Cluedo?
I hate you Butler! (for On the busesfans only)I reckon its the butler that did it
Look at this post on red cafe, this gives you an idea of how much they know about the past and current investigations.
They didn't win convincingly. They probably bribed the FIFA judges, making them interpret the procedural rules in a specific way. These judges ruled that the statute of limitations applied to the charges and that the timing should be calculated from a particular date... Consequently, their "victory" was achieved through exploiting a technicality rather than addressing the core issue... The evidence itself was not dismissed by the FIFA court.
Not the brightest ,the rags?I’ve had similar to that by scousers. Main one is we picked 2 judges & no other reason. The funny thing is those notions have been put in their head by the MSM.
Not the brightest ,the rags?
I think Pep definitely got told something along the lines of what Tolm said this afternoon. For him to say come on Premier League get a move on he knows we hold all the aces, he knows it.
And for that shithouse chairman of theirs to say he's washed his hands of it he has defo felt the heat from all directions, maybe the penny dropped when he watched Sheikh Mansour meeting Charlie and shaking his hand. I'm sure he was watching the TV thinking he looks familiar that chap, really familiar.......GULP!!!
He's shit his pants has that lad.
The recourse to law is on very narrow grounds, basically irregularity in the process.
Witness statements, eg when the CEO and Chairman of Etihad Airways swore under oath in a Swiss court(CAS) that the sponsorship of MCFC by the airline had been fully authorised by him alone and that it had proved to be of excellent commercial value, in fact it had exceeded all of the airlines expectations. The court agreed his evidence was irrefutable.
And we’ve not lost since.
So, not quite the effect they were undoubtedly hoping for.……
Yeah, it was the butler wot done it all right.. in the library (where we play home games, apparently..) with the oil rig..I reckon its the butler that did it
In simplified terms......
In simplified terms......