PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

LeonardoDaVnci said:
The 5 person PL board who collectively chose to charge City with the "115" includes a barrister/judge Mathew Ryder. He describes himself as a "passionate" football fan (well he would do). He's very coy in public about where he directs his football "passion". He uses X to express his views on legal matters and hand out guidance to rookie lawyers.
In his tweet below he emphasises the critical distinction between FACT and OPINION. So can we assume the PL submissions will be devoid of opinions, conjecture and unjustifiable inferences when dealing with our Etihad sponsorship?, Hope he's not a hypocrite...
View attachment 111856
Click to expand...
Amazed those hastily cobbled together 'charges' had any input from a legal professional. If a builder put a wall up to the same standard he'd be regarded as a cowboy.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Thanks! Seems a bit of a wrong’un. I assume he was charged as well?

It still doesn’t disallow Tiffin from asking a question about the UAE though.

I’ve always been a Parkin man, personally.
Click to expand...

I have no dog here, and I didn’t know anything about her husband. Nor do I really care.

But as a concept, and this could be anyone asking any such question, it doesn't disallow it, but it makes it quite hollow. It would be like asking her if she is comfortable part of her household income is coming from a person with an appaling employment rights record. A basic cheap shot. And journalists private lives do come into it, unfortunate or not, if it concerns accountsbility and pretense of integrity, and perceived hypocrisy can be biggie.

Either way, while I have zero issue with the question, imo it was hardly a big or significant one that nobody has ever asked. She wasn't in this case exercising journalistic integrity or championing anything, she was just trotting out a clichéd overused go-to bit of contraryism for something for people to latch onto, to maintain a bit of relevance. Which, by the number of pages on it, has worked.

She won't be the first or last to do it, Abu Dhabi and MCC won't be the first or last subjects of such questions either. There will always be these issues, these investments, people will always piggyback them for their careers including journalists. The ones that Really care about it and try meaningfully tackle it, tend to be ones you don't hear that much from imo.
 
Last edited:
M18CTID said:
To sum up, Annabel Tiffin is in no position to lecture any entity about appalling human rights records when her own husband has a, cough cough, appalling human rights record of his own.
Click to expand...

& that’s the response that should be emailed back to her need to ask about human rights.
 
M18CTID said:
To sum up, Annabel Tiffin is in no position to lecture any entity about appalling human rights records when her own husband has a, cough cough, appalling human rights record of his own.
Click to expand...

I think her question is totally fair game. There is a link there. Might not be entirely relevant to the discussion at hand, but it is there to point out.

I think the comments about her own household are also totally fair game. There is a link there. Might not be entirely relevant to the discussion, but it is there to point out. In exactly the same measure.

With both, there is a bit of a shared answer too. I.e. It’s a bit more complex.

The other comments on her face, demeanour etc, are not really pertinent imo, but it is what it is.
 
M18CTID said:
To sum up, Annabel Tiffin is in no position to lecture any entity about appalling human rights records when her own husband has a, cough cough, appalling human rights record of his own.
Click to expand...
Neatly put.

Like charity is said to begin at home so should criticism of all versions of human rights.
 
Human rights is such an oft thrown around term for people who want to appear to be seen as being informed and wanting to do the right thing but the reality is that human rights are so much more complex than the simplistic questions and terms that are so often put forward by these quasi journalists, human rights are not a black and white area and have as much to do with culture, upbringing than anything and our incessant need to try and westernise the world and impose our values on others is what drives people to ask these questions and want them answered in the same simplistic manner that the questions are asked because the reality is that the complexities involved, not to mention some of the human rights abuses purported in our country would blow their tiny little mind so maybe they should get down off their pulpit, put away their bullhorn, stop asking questions for clout and go away and educate themselves and come back and have an informed discussion if they were truly bothered about these matters.
 
I know there haven't been many new developments recently, but let's try and keep the thread on topic.

Not sure Annabel Tiffin really merits this much discussion! Probably more relevant to the media thread anyway, but as someone else said, comments about her appearance are a bit unnecessary.
 
Coatigan said:
I think her question is totally fair game. There is a link there. Might not be entirely relevant to the discussion at hand, but it is there to point out.

I think the comments about her own household are also totally fair game. There is a link there. Might not be entirely relevant to the discussion, but it is there to point out. In exactly the same measure.

With both, there is a bit of a shared answer too. I.e. It’s a bit more complex.

The other comments on her face, demeanour etc, are not really pertinent imo, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Naah, she was linking the development with the Abu Dhabi "state". She is supposed to be a local journalist, she should, and she surely does, know that the investments are in a private capacity. She knew what she was doing and it was poor.

It's the same as the national press does with "state-owned", "state-funded" and the rest and what Neville does with "Abu Dhabi". It's all just to downgrade the success of the club and the impact on the local area. At least I hope it is, because the other alternative is a damn sight worse.
 
tumblr_ntw5ucWPpq1snteogo1_r4_250.gifv


Jaysus, last time I checked on this thread the main discussion was about an ex-Villa no-mark stating he believed Pep would leave us if found guilty.

Annabel Tiffin? Really guys?!
 
halfcenturyup said:
Naah, she was linking the development with the Abu Dhabi "state". She is supposed to be a local journalist, she should, and she surely does, know that the investments are in a private capacity. She knew what she was doing and it was poor.

It's the same as the national press does with "state-owned", "state-funded" and the rest and what Neville does with "Abu Dhabi". It's all just to downgrade the success of the club and the impact on the local area. At least I hope it is, because the other alternative is a damn sight worse.
Click to expand...
I’ve noticed quite a few media recently referring to us as “Abu Dhabi-owned” which is a bit more nebulous/neutral than “state-owned” which is plainly an untruth. We refer to American-owned clubs all the time but it doesn’t imply the State - so maybe “Abu Dhabi-owned” is a small step in the right direction.
 
Last edited:
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