PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Moss Side's Finest said:
The thing with the media, opposing fans and the likes of spitty c*nt is that not a single one of them will have a clue what the "115 charges" are, it just sounds a lot.

This was why the cartel communicated it as such 'it just sounds bad'. But you can't judge seriousness on a number.

An analogy would be like claiming someone with 114 minor driving convictions has to be far worse than someone with 1 murder conviction.

The above doesn't even take into account that most of the 115 charges are actually dissected components of a much much smaller number of broader charges. As above, you have to query the motive behind communicating the larger number of 'symptoms' rather than the overarching root causes
Click to expand...
Good points but I think we know the motive -presentation of the allegations was weaponised for maximum damage. It helped win us the treble though !
 
homerdog said:
Ironic really, considering that most of them changed their allegiance to the Cockney clubs when they nearly got relegated from the league and were playing at Priestfield and Withdean. They only came back when they got the shiny new stadium. As you say, Southern shithouses.
Click to expand...
That did form part of my dressing down.
 
Gordyola said:
The question won't include "two young"

Pep needs a good brief on this one for him to go to war on the jounos who are shit stirring

Along the lines of, there is no excuse but Im not having the 99.9999999% of impeccable City fans given a negative label, every club in the world have some people who don't behave in the correct way. I have heard some fans of clubs disrespecting City players who have passed. I feel that the media jump on every negative opportunity to paint this magnificent club and its people. Well, I'm not having it, our people will behave impeccable on City and pay due repect to Bobby and at the same time Francis just like we did at the Munich remembrance. Next
Click to expand...
I was right some daft twat did ask the question and thankfully Pep responded very well to it.
 
Xhavenjoe said:
Just as a matter of interest, why did the other clubs refrain from signing the letter?
Click to expand...
The 9 clubs were those who were in the hunt for Euro qualification. They were requesting that the CAS decision wasn't delayed until the season after.
So probably the other clubs weren't asked because it didn't make any difference to them
 
Xhavenjoe said:
Just as a matter of interest, why did the other clubs refrain from signing the letter?
Click to expand...

I think that's the wrong way of looking at it, bar one club.

The letter was asking that the case be held in the season it was written, i.e. before entries for the next season's European competitions were finalised. I think the gist was "get it done, don't let City drag it out".

The clubs whose names were on it were those who had an interest at the time of writing in Europe. Only Liverpool were pretty much certain of being in the CL. 3-4 were on the fringes of the CL, and the best outcome for them was that a ban for City freed a space up.

That then had a knock-on effect to the EL places - I think Burnley were about 11th, but were fairly close in points from an EL place.

SheffU were the only club in the top half whose name wasn't on it.
I think Wolves announced they weren't going to be involved in pursuing it almost immediately, memory says because the Wolves fans told them it was a crap way of behaving.
 
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