PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

levets said:
I’ve tried to find evidence of that statement but can’t. Every article I googled says she gave no reason. It would be quite telling if it were true and should be followed up.
Click to expand...
Yes she gave her reason later. It’s there somewhere.
 
Metalartin said:
Correct, Stefan did say that and Simon ended up saying fair point... But he's gone back to his original stance regardless. lol That's what we are dealing with here.
Click to expand...
Exactly...the guy is a circus clown, all he does is play to the crowd. He knows the audience the station gets and like the others, he knows WHAT they want to hear- even though he fully understands and recognises Stefans comment as FACT

That's all it is. A big game and about creating money/revenue wherever they work. Jordan does it, gets paid, goes home
 
The Lightbowne Cowboy said:
Another great post mate. It's most definitely feeding time at the zoo and we're the grub. It's vile! Everybody is piling on because they only believe what they want to believe, but I'll wager that a few of these bastards actually think there's a chance we maybe innocent but fuck writing anything of that nature. It's a full on bullying smear campaign to turn every football fan against us,and make every wannabe kid supporter think twice about choosing this nasty horrible club who have cheated at every level and also kill grannies and stand on frogs. I'm just hoping and praying that we win(which I think we will, though it may take a penalty shootout) then take certain cretinous and poisonous bastards to the work house. I'd also love to see City take on the bbc and bring the paedophile protecting bastards to their knees because of the shite they've continuously let their parasetic evil bastard(so called) journalists write. Just like Wolfy used to say..Come that glorious day brother!
Click to expand...
!000% agree!!!!!!! Getting young supporters to turn away from us is absolutely part of the agenda. They fear our potential for growth even more than they fear the current "monster"...
 
homerdog said:
Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, Chair of the CMS Committee, said (about Masters):

Equally puzzling was his insistence that the charges and punishment regime is entirely independent of the Premier League, when there is documentary evidence of an attempt to move the goalposts with a proposal for a structured policy for sanctions.

Surely these comments kill the case against us stone dead, the KCs on the "independent" panel won't want to have their professional judgement questioned by MPs if they find us guilty?
Click to expand...
The Independent Regulator is nailed on, the last paragraph is very telling.

Screenshot_20240126_205646_BBC Sport.jpg
 
they said last week there is a development on our case and only thing was a drunk Ceferin saying he is a lawyer but still can say stupid things without thinking.
which wasnt really a development on the PL case.

media tho completely silent on Spurs owner getting caught in court. imagine Mansour is done on insider trading big time and sport media not to talk about it and asking government to step in and force sale of club etc.
 
MrsBanks said:
DCMS writes to Masters following his Select Committee appearance
https://committees.parliament.uk/co...writes-to-premier-league-and-sports-minister/
Click to expand...

The context was that the committee were saying ‘what about City’ & under pressure he described them as smaller clubs. I thought the DCMS were a disgrace & if that’s all they’ve taken from the meeting you may as well hand it over to Talksport.

Never thought I’d defend that prick Masters but that panel was wank!
 
Gaylord du Bois said:
Why ? He's obviously had to accept it but it doesn't mean that he has to agree with it. They were prosecuting us and lost on appeal. He/ they are bound to be smarting from it.
After all, it can't be easy having you're lying, twisted, arses, exposed in public.
Click to expand...
Anyone with any dignity particularly in such a role should keep schtum, classless imho . Probably disqualified himself from any future serious appointments!
 
levets said:
I’ve tried to find evidence of that statement but can’t. Every article I googled says she gave no reason. It would be quite telling if it were true and should be followed up.
Click to expand...
Things can be made to disappear. Not saying it's happened in this case because I haven't got a clue, but I remember reading an article with Scudamore, he was talking about Leicester some time after they had won the league. He basically said people got very nervous after Leicester won the league. The article then disappeared like a puff of smoke.
 
cheekybids said:
The context was that the committee were saying ‘what about City’ & under pressure he described them as smaller clubs. I thought the DCMS were a disgrace & if that’s all they’ve taken from the meeting you may as well hand it over to Talksport.

Never thought I’d defend that prick Masters but that panel was wank!
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Iassel said:
Albeit for reasons that aren’t clear at the moment, Ceferin has now come out and essentially said CAS got it wrong and City were bang to rights, so there is certainly a non-zero chance the PL tribunal finds differently to CAS.
Click to expand...
You not joining in the post match celebrations? We've scored at spurs, it's a groundbreaking moment for ickle citeh.
 
Iassel said:
Albeit for reasons that aren’t clear at the moment, Ceferin has now come out and essentially said CAS got it wrong and City were bang to rights, so there is certainly a non-zero chance the PL tribunal finds differently to CAS.
Click to expand...

WTF does non-zero mean?

What points of law did Ceferin base his assumption on? Ah I see he was just spouting innuendo & sensationalism which isn’t what trial lawyers normally do but is common for politicians.

Sniff, sniff, sniff………
 
Damanino said:
they said last week there is a development on our case and only thing was a drunk Ceferin saying he is a lawyer but still can say stupid things without thinking.
which wasnt really a development on the PL case.
Click to expand...
Maybe there has been a development but not one they were hoping for so they went with the Ceferin angle instead?
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
The crazy thing is under the first iteration of FFP, Leeds, Portsmouth, Rangers & Fiorentina would've passed. Go figure! \0/

It was always about stopping City & never about stopping reckless owners willing to gamble their clubs' very existence with a throw of the dice.
Click to expand...
If we'd had FFS/PSR in 2008, we'd have passed easily, even without the allowance for owner investment. After all the allowances for things like depreciation and youth development expenses, I think we'd have shown a profit.

But, as Ivesaid before, in June 2008 we nearly went into administration as we couldn't pay the second instalment on the Sven transfers the previous summer. You have to ask therefore, what is the point of FFP? Because it would have stopped us, Leeds or Portsmouth from going under.
 
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