PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The Shallyman said:
Yeah, but if the Abu Dhabi Government contacted the British government, in order to influence an ongoing investigation or to make it go away, then that doesn't look very good, does it?

Especially if we are adamant that City are not state owned, so why is the Abu Dhabi government getting involved in a football matter?

If the intention was to have their day in court, you wouldn't be knocking on the door of number 10, as some people on here have mentioned, threatening to cancel Billions of investment.

If that is the case, then the charges have to have some merit.
Click to expand...

If you read all of this thread you should know that those charges are agenda driven by the American owners who want their ball back and want to discredit our achievements.
 
Beaker said:
Except nowhere in the article does it state the Abu Dhabi government contacted the British government. It’s the foreign office in London talking to the British embassy in Abu Dhabi, so essentially one arm of the British government talking to another.

Your misinterpretation of what has been written feels almost deliberate, it’s no surprise that posters on here are suspicious of your motives.
Click to expand...
Agree and find it interesting that mr shallyman can’t back up his baseless bollocks . Bit of a sniff tbh.
 
For a UK business like the like Premier league to accuse the UAE royal family of cooking the books this is going to cause issues far further up the food chain than Richard Masters , havent got a clue how much investment the UAE have poured into the UK but i am quite sure our government will not put that investment under jeopardy because some Yank owned clubs with an agenda have bullied Master's into making charges against us.
These charges are a non starter , they are not going anywhere , i was worried about the UEFA charges but i have no such issues with these 105 jumped up charges , any hearing or panel will not be deciding the outcome, as previously stated the UK government has too much to lose , they are probably already working on how the Premier league make this go away without losing face , the 'istree clubs puppet Richard Masters being dismissed would be a good start.
Employ someone who has the interests of all 20 league clubs to preside over the premier league , not just the Yankee doodle racists owners who think they can run the Premier league.
 
Ric said:
Without knowing what was said, it’s impossible to say if it’s a good (or bad) thing. It was certainly inevitable though.
Click to expand...

No, I mean I think the inevitability of it is a bad thing in itself.

Whether it’s a good thing or bad thing for us in this matter, I agree.
 
Paladin said:
Indulge me as one of the thickies, but why wouldn't a law enacted in 2000 be relevant to actions that occurred in 2022 and 2023?
Click to expand...

I think TH misunderstood.

The comment I replied to suggested the athletic wanted all correspondence from 2000 onwards.

I pointed out that they simply used the FOI act from 2000 to ask about 3 months worth of correspondence 12/22-3/23
 
As a 'benefit' of my free access to The Athletic I can see all the comments (if I could be bothered I can also comment but don't do so).

Needless to say they are exactly as you'd expect if you went on Red Cafe or RAWK. Strangely The Athletic rarely open comments on any articles on this subject. Here are some examples:
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2023-09-22-21-23-56-342_com.theathletic.jpg
    Screenshot_2023-09-22-21-23-56-342_com.theathletic.jpg
    396.6 KB · Views: 209
FFS get the facts right. The shitty article states the following:

The UK government has admitted its embassy in Abu Dhabi and the Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) in London have discussed the charges.

It’s not number 10 discussing anything it’s the fucking UK embassy in AD.
 
Eds said:
FFS get the facts right. The shitty article states the following:

The UK government has admitted its embassy in Abu Dhabi and the Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) in London have discussed the charges.

It’s not number 10 discussing anything it’s the fucking UK embassy in AD.
Click to expand...
Here is the headline..
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2023-09-22-21-28-56-436_com.theathletic.jpg
    Screenshot_2023-09-22-21-28-56-436_com.theathletic.jpg
    762 KB · Views: 185
Ric said:
I’m probably missing something, but still don’t understand why you think that is necessarily a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Because it shouldn’t be discussed at all at that level, to me that being an inevitability helps the argument for anyone saying not just a state but anyone with links or direct association to a state or ruling body also shouldn’t be owning a football club.

I’ve never agreed with that, but that’s because I believe their private ownership should be completely separated from their state role.
 
Eds said:
FFS get the facts right. The shitty article states the following:

The UK government has admitted its embassy in Abu Dhabi and the Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) in London have discussed the charges.

It’s not number 10 discussing anything it’s the fucking UK embassy in AD.
Click to expand...
That’s right mate. The FCDO is not part of the uk government and thus could be argued independent-;)

Just like Mansour & Abu Dhabi!

Lazy journalism again…
 
waspish said:
If you read all of this thread you should know that those charges are agenda driven by the American owners who want their ball back and want to discredit our achievements.
Click to expand...
Agenda driven, just like Shallyman and the rest of the Red-tops.

Absolutely love seeing their salty tears flow on these threads.
 
meltonblue said:
Because it shouldn’t be discussed at all at that level, to me that being an inevitability helps the argument for anyone saying not just a state but anyone with links or direct association to a state or ruling body also shouldn’t be owning a football club.

I’ve never agreed with that, but that’s because I believe their private ownership should be completely separated from their state role.
Click to expand...
Fair enough mate. I’d say this was a fairly exceptional circumstance though. If Mansour believes the club are being treated unjustly, as he clearly does, then it was perhaps inevitable that he’d use whatever leverage available to him. He was never going to just stand back and let a multi billion pound asset potentially get fucked over.
 
I think if the club don't want to comment on this article or others they should redirect the press questions to;
Media Duscussion
Bluemoon forum
T'internet.
But bar them from the match day thread as that would give the impression Bluemoon is frequented by one or two fruit cakes ;-)
PS. But maybe some journalists would fit right in there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top