PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[supercity88]

Eevry time I hear this phrase "go nuclear" I am reminded of a meeting I went to with my partner about 20 years ago. We were in a serious legal dispute with some guys who were trying to take control of the shares of our company. We were in this meeting with a solicitor at Eversheds, a serious big hitter, and were talking about something like if they decided to withdraw cash without our consent or similar.

Anyway my partner confidently stated "If they do that we'll throw the book at them" and this solictor just casually but pointedly asked "What book?". She had no response.

I think this "go nuclear" phrase is the same: baseless bluster. There is no "nuclear".

A strongly worded letter would be my last resort!

 

[johnnytapia]

What was the price difference, out of interest?

He overpaid

 

[Eric Hitchmough]

Hi mate. Below.

https://x.com/realtolmie/status/1727236874115391570?s=46&t=_h4l-9_J0Vngw9jIG-nprQ

Much appreciated, many thanks mate

 

[Ric]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

 

[richards30]

City trying to establish a precedent for Statute of Limitations?

I imagine to be honest its now gloves are off and we are stirring the shit to prove how the likes of the dippers have gotten away with murder over the years yet are butthurt when something doesnt go their way? We have been attacked probably way more than we would have imagined and have now decided to show our fighting side and respond.

 

[richards30]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

Shit stirring from our side imo in response to the dippers demanding action against us asap.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Is this City throwing up evidence to support a case based around biased treatment against them?

 

[CC1]

Is this City throwing up evidence to support a case based around biased treatment against them?

That makes sense. More likely to be used as evidence of bias, in our favour, than actually revisiting the matter

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

Is there any chance you can show the rest of his tweets please mate? I don’t have a Twitter/X account so it’s not displaying his page when I click on it.

Google RealTolmie and his latest tweets appear at the top.

 

[MCFC1993]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

Can only think it's to try and get some sort of precedent set.

Like you say, can't see anything coming of it with it being settled already.

 

[Pontypool Blue]

This is the level of fuckwittery we’re dealing with:

There is also the small issue not lost on this melt of the estimated nearly 5 million documents in this case that would need to be read.
By my quick (and sometime flawed) calculations this would take nearly 20 years for 1 person to read at 10 hours per day!
Not sure how many pages you can fit on a tweet but I think X may have to be renamed XXL if it was all uploaded there.

 

[mattcity5]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

Going off Tolmie's tweets, the settlement would have been against PL rules, so would probably be another chance to hammer us anyway even though we were the victims (and not the dippers for once).

 

[flb]

Is this City throwing up evidence to support a case based around biased treatment against them?

Sounds plausible, I mean lets have this right, the PL , and any other shit kicker of a club who arse licks to them , should be very worried , just in case we do actually hold a smoking gun, I'm sure the club have a few aces up their sleeves, maybe now our hierarchy are throwing a few hand grenades about.

 

[SSL2]

Is this true? Nothing anywhere else about it

I've had no reason to doubt Tolime in the past - he is arguably city's best source of info on twitter these days.

 

[Bez]

I’d say Everton with breaking the rules by only £19m and getting a 10 point reduction might have a bit of an appeals case by asking why United breaking the rules by £260m (iirc) ‘a small breach’ resulted in only a £300k fine.

Applying the logic of the slavering idiots talking about 115 = 1150 points reduction, it follows that United should be revisited and have a 130 point reduction instead of their fine…

How about United get a 3 point deduction and they have to keep Tent Peg and Maguire for another 10 years

 

[Norbiton]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

Perhaps a gentle reminder that the Premier League ruled that a case was too old to investigate

 

[Blueknows]

£1 a pint

Plus a £1 in the bucket for 'sick kids'

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

I'd love for our defence team to get anyone in the media to come forward and tell just exactly what it is like in the media backrooms with regards to how City are treated and reported on. We can all see the way it goes, the imperative to show reports about City in a negative light. It feels almost like it is a process they must follow. Surely someone could could split ranks and tell all.

 

[waspish]

I think it would be very difficult to get the PL to revisit the hacking case, given that was settled between the clubs and is presumably time-barred anyway.

Is there actually a paper trail of this 1m payout?

 

[waspish]

Is this City throwing up evidence to support a case based around biased treatment against them?

Yep that's my guess! Premier league didn't want to investigate it even though it's very serious! Was it because it was Liverpool who did the hacking and they have influence?