1961_vintage
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 16,544
#the irrefutables.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Fallingbostel Blue
Well-Known Member
I think the report has mixed this up, it is us who said we have irrefutable evidence and not the Premier League.Not sure if this has been posted but some quotes from Kieran Maguire. Sounds like he’s been talking to people close to the club and that they’re relaxed about the whole thing. That’s not anything new of course but it’s interesting to see that our position hasn’t changed.
One other thing that stuck out in this article is that the PL claim they have “irrefutable evidence” against us. I’ve never seen this reported anywhere before:
Expert shares how Man City now feel about the 115 Financial Fair Play charges
"Senior sources tell me"www.manchestercity.news
Scaring Europe to Death
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2014
- Messages
- 5,160
Neither Maguire nor the Premier League actually mention irrefutable evidence in this article.
It's the author speaking in lazy assumptions
It's the author speaking in lazy assumptions
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
Yep apparently Pep and Txiki are fooking off.
Didsbury Dave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2007
- Messages
- 39,166
I’ve been involved in plenty of legal disputes and everybody always claims their evidence is “irrefutable”. It’s just posturing.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
The PL have been much more careful with their comments after the UEFA case came unstuck following Ceferin's outlandish claim about their "concrete case." I am sure you are correct. If they had "irrefutable evidence" it would not be going to a new panel. The Mancini allegations go back almost 15 years. The case is a farce.
Let's remember we are not being accused of breaking the law. This is not a criminal matter, it's a made up bunch of rules borne of dubious intentions. The expressions rules are meant to be broken, bending the rules, and there are exceptions to every rule came about for a reason. I'm not saying City breached any rules, but I am saying when the reality of our standing as one of the most prosperous and successful clubs in the current modern world of professional football both on the pitch and off are measured against the level of intense scrutiny and relentless digging it becomes very apparent that this is a witch hunt, a hatchet job, plain and simple. They should be looking at clubs that continue to spend excessively while accumulating great debt. Our owners have taken on a level of risk commensurate with a certain level of expectations and have succeeded massively in attaining great success both competitively and financially. It's what anyone should call a successful business venture as well as a successful sporting one. We're not asking for any bailouts, financial relief, or placing the club in any financial duress. The "charges" are all about us winning, simple as...us taking the perch away from the "traditional" red clubs. I can't wait until this is all behind us. And I don't give a single fuck about what fans of the Rags, Dippers, or Arse say afterwards. I just care about us continuing to operate among the very best...
CADED...that's my City, All Day, Every Day...
This isn't a legal dispute however...
Winchester
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2020
- Messages
- 3,324
- Team supported
- Mcfc
Hilarious
richards30
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 May 2009
- Messages
- 31,784
Not sure if this has been posted but some quotes from Kieran Maguire. Sounds like he’s been talking to people close to the club and that they’re relaxed about the whole thing. That’s not anything new of course but it’s interesting to see that our position hasn’t changed.
One other thing that stuck out in this article is that the PL claim they have “irrefutable evidence” against us. I’ve never seen this reported anywhere before:
Expert shares how Man City now feel about the 115 Financial Fair Play charges
"Senior sources tell me"
If they had irrefutable evidence then we would already have been fucked over?
wolviedinho
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 23,926
- Location
- Doublethink
- Team supported
- Super City from Maine Road(not wolves)
Yea let’s see this evidence you bent pricks! No? Why not? Because it don’t fucking exist or city would be in liquidation by now instead we are treble winners -:)
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
Pye and Cityxtra, oh and Alvarez is pissing off too.
Manchester City braced for major organisational change with managerial and sporting director exit
Manchester City are seemingly on the verge of what could arguably their biggest change at the club since the takeover of 2008, according to a new report. The Premier League champions are fresh off the…
cityxtra.co.uk
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
As wanky expressions go, it’s right up there with ‘legal team’.
HolisticJim
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 4,674
Not really sure why everyone on here seems to think this is silly.Pye and Cityxtra, oh and Alvarez is pissing off too.
Manchester City braced for major organisational change with managerial and sporting director exit
Manchester City are seemingly on the verge of what could arguably their biggest change at the club since the takeover of 2008, according to a new report. The Premier League champions are fresh off the…
The artical says Pep won't sign another extension and Txiki will leave around the same time too.
This is likely to happen unfortunately.
I doubt Pep will sign another extension.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
My gut feeling is that Pep's swansong will be the first proper FIFA club World Cup in USA over the summer of 2025. He will sign off with City as undisputed world champions. And, if that happens, he will be the greatest manager of all time whatever the bitter English media says.
So, we're almost 9 months on since the charges, does it take that long to prepare a prosecution and defense after a four year witchunt?
Anybody from a legal background hazard a reasonable accurate guess at the state of play, or is this a case even our legal experts are gazumped on?
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 69,766
It was said that it would take years. We’re probably not even half way through the process.
Based on?
Kinkys Left Foot
Well-Known Member
By the time this gets heard at any tribunal hearing some of the matters discussed will be over 15 years old, the youngest charges in excess of 7 years old. It's a fucking joke.
We'd have heard something if they actually had any evidence of note with the amount of ferreting done by journalists on the subject. Theyve been lkke a dog with a bone.
Particularly as people like Masters can't keep their traps shut for 5 minutes never mind 5 years.
Something would have leaked that's not already been discussed ad infitum on these pages. Yet there's nout, nichts, nada, nothing. Make of that what you will.
We'd have heard something if they actually had any evidence of note with the amount of ferreting done by journalists on the subject. Theyve been lkke a dog with a bone.
Particularly as people like Masters can't keep their traps shut for 5 minutes never mind 5 years.
Something would have leaked that's not already been discussed ad infitum on these pages. Yet there's nout, nichts, nada, nothing. Make of that what you will.