PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

By being quiet? Fair enough I understand why they would do that tbh. I am beginning to think though that some City fans are only hearing what the media are saying all the time.
It's not for us to prove our innocence but for them to prove our guilt. No need for us to say anything further even tho some of our fans would like reassuring!! What reassures me is that the owners are going about growing us more and investing more and more in everything at the club. That's all I need I'd be worried if all that stopped.
 
Any uplift from a club statement saying that we are vigorously defending ourselves in the case against us and that we are confident that we will be cleared would last for a week at most. After that it would be as you were on here and nothing whatsoever would change with the narrative outside of the club and our supporters. It would just be a token effort as it has no bearing on the actual outcome.
 
Any uplift from a club statement saying that we are vigorously defending ourselves in the case against us and that we are confident that we will be cleared would last for a week at most. After that it would be as you were on here and nothing whatsoever would change with the narrative outside of the club and our supporters. It would just be a token effort as it has no bearing on the actual outcome.
I imagine it would last more than a week and be a welcomed boost for many. We were charged in Feb 2023 and it is only now some are hoping for the club to re state it's position. Hardly impatience.

As usual it becomes - massive unquestioning, club are perfect fan v moaning, spoiled fanny wipes debate.

A simple acknowledgement of the fans and adamant reiteration of our innocence would go a long way at the moment.
 
Some of these old Samuel articles are fascinating, looking back.
Very true, he's just about the only journalist I go out of my way to read. When you consider this article was published 10 years ago, some of the content is a pretty accurate portrayal of today's ownership.

His comments are interesting when he states that the City investment by SM is very much his personal investment and he describes Malcolm Glazer in the same vein. Makes you wonder why he's allowed Scruffy Jim to enter the fray? I think we all know the answer to that.

The paragraph on how the Arab nations do their business quietly, efficiently and away from the public domain, tells us exactly we why we have maintained a dignified silence whilst our detractors do their dirty deeds through a compliant MSM, podcasts and rabid twitter rants.

We are in VERY good hands.
 
Once the IR is in place that’s 100% correct but at this moment there is almost a vacuum
We all know what happened last time the SL was mooted but there does seem to be a massive backlash at this time against the PL . I don’t know if it’s close enough to result in a mutiny akin to crickets Packer

It would require clubs and players to set up outside the FA/UEFA /PL and FIFA and would suffer fines and points deductions .

With Packer and the recent golf breakaway it’s amazing how quickly these breakaways re integrate back into main stream

It's true that, until the bill passes as presently worded, there is nothing to stop a club joining a Super League but you can't seriously be thinking Masters has ruined the reputation of the PL so much (yet) that fans would now want an ESL? Liverpool and United fans, maybe. But there are one or two fans in the country who support other clubs who may have a growing distaste for Masters' PL but won't prefer an ESL.

Also, it would be a hell of a risk. There is nothing to stop the bill being amended to cover the period since it's announcement that would prevent clubs who left before the bill was passed from playing any games in England.

ESL is never going to include English clubs now, imho.
 
Very true, he's just about the only journalist I go out of my way to read. When you consider this article was published 10 years ago, some of the content is a pretty accurate portrayal of today's ownership.

His comments are interesting when he states that the City investment by SM is very much his personal investment and he describes Malcolm Glazer in the same vein. Makes you wonder why he's allowed Scruffy Jim to enter the fray? I think we all know the answer to that.

The paragraph on how the Arab nations do their business quietly, efficiently and away from the public domain, tells us exactly we why we have maintained a dignified silence whilst our detractors do their dirty deeds through a compliant MSM, podcasts and rabid twitter rants.

We are in VERY good hands.

Also noticeable is the lack of any innuendo, resentment, bitterness at that time. Not sure if that was just Samuel or the press as a whole ..? I am old, I can't remember.
 
I imagine it would last more than a week and be a welcomed boost for many. We were charged in Feb 2023 and it is only now some are hoping for the club to re state it's position. Hardly impatience.

As usual it becomes - massive unquestioning, club are perfect fan v moaning, spoiled fanny wipes debate.

A simple acknowledgement of the fans and adamant reiteration of our innocence would go a long way at the moment.
But for how long? How long before the fans need placating again?
 
I imagine it would last more than a week and be a welcomed boost for many. We were charged in Feb 2023 and it is only now some are hoping for the club to re state it's position. Hardly impatience.

As usual it becomes - massive unquestioning, club are perfect fan v moaning, spoiled fanny wipes debate.

A simple acknowledgement of the fans and adamant reiteration of our innocence would go a long way at the moment.

Headline the next day: "City try to placate nervous fans"

Talksport discussion: "Why are City worried so much about the outcome?".

Jordan quote: "If City were so confident, they would keep quiet. Something must have happened."

Cue panic amongst supporters and a hundred YouTube videos saying City are on the backfoot and are going down.

You must realise this is what will happen?
 
It's true that, until the bill passes as presently worded, there is nothing to stop a club joining a Super League but you can't seriously be thinking Masters has ruined the reputation of the PL so much (yet) that fans would now want an ESL? Liverpool and United fans, maybe. But there are one or two fans in the country who support other clubs who may have a growing distaste for Masters' PL but won't prefer an ESL.

Also, it would be a hell of a risk. There is nothing to stop the bill being amended to cover the period since it's announcement that would prevent clubs who left before the bill was passed from playing any games in England.

ESL is never going to include English clubs now, imho.
If I've read it correctly, all clubs need to be licensed to play after the regulator comes in. Any club that had left the 'approved' league(s) might have difficulty getting a licence
 
And regulated clubs will be prohibited from entering a prohibited competition. A prohibited competition is one that, inter alia, is not merit-based, or jeopardises existing competitions or harms the heritage of English football.

So they can't just decide to up and leave. They legally can't leave at all.
Thanks for the clarification. Hadn’t realised the change was so restrictive. Must stop eating blue cheese.
 
Headline the next day: "City try to placate nervous fans"

Talksport discussion: "Why are City worried so much about the outcome?".

Jordan quote: "If City were so confident, they would keep quiet. Something must have happened."

Cue panic amongst supporters and a hundred YouTube videos saying City are on the backfoot and are going down.

You must realise this is what will happen?
Or
All outlets - City strenuously reiterate their innocence and will not tolerate libelous and slanderous comments.
Simon Jordan - I need to keep my big flabby, dough boy, mouth shut.
 
If I've read it correctly, all clubs need to be licensed to play after the regulator comes in. Any club that had left the 'approved' league(s) might have difficulty getting a licence

Yes, that's right. If a club left before the bill is passed, their leaving couldn't be prevented (unless the wording is changed) but they wouldn't get a licence so they couldn't play in England.
 
Last edited:
Also noticeable is the lack of any innuendo, resentment, bitterness at that time. Not sure if that was just Samuel or the press as a whole ..? I am old, I can't remember.
The press as a whole, even rival clubs, together with other PL fan bases.

It was as if our club was simply "allowed" to end our 34 year wait for glory. Dismissed as a one-off, patted on the head, their long suffering fans have been through the wringer and deserve it, that kind of mentality. The caveat at the time was that the Arabs would soon get bored and Ickle Citeh will be back in wilderness for eternity.

The problem was, we went and did it again...again..and again. The Aguero moment, at the cost of our Stretford neighbours, was lauded around the world at the time, but that sounded the death knell for one of the SKY4, so they mobilised and the resentment, bitterness and innuendo commenced.

Clear and obvious.
 
I think I don't care for your opinion, bucko
Passive aggressive much. It’s alright you saying you don’t care if we spent more than allowed everyone else did but the allegations amount to fraud. If proven leaving aside the relegation that would follow police etc would be involved and then criminal proceedings striking off of directors etc
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top