PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Centurions said:
What was this?
Click to expand...

Centurions said:
What was this?
Click to expand...
Slsbn tweeted saying how we might be dealt with for noncooperation with an extract from the EPL judgement on ”the club” saying far ftom cooperating they were obstructive - in a nutshell. Many, me included, assumed the club was city but….
Slsbn later revealed the club was Everton, and that on appeal the IC rejected the PL assertion of lack of cooperatio/obstruction and stated that on the contrary Everton had fully cooperated.
He caught a few including me, but just shows (imo) why City were right to challenge the PL all the way
 
norman said:
I assumed it was us at first doh.
When you read the PL statement about Everton’s non cooperation, and compare the IC statement, you have to wonder what the hell is going on with the PL investigation board.
The nagging worry I’ve had since the 115 was announced is the difficulty in imagining the PL is incompetent and would issue without pretty substantial evidence to justify proceeding, and presumably taking legal advice first.
The more I read about it, and seeing what a farce PSR is becoming, and seeing the utter disdain the IC had for the PL view on non-cooperation, the more I’m inclined to the view that the PL is incompetent.
I re-read the “merits” judgement after City were defeated in the commercial court.
I think that City were trying to block a pure fishing expedition by the PL panel, but could only have the issue independently tested by a tribunal not linked to the PL. City were legitimately concerned about the PL panel being allowed to make sweeping requests for documents without specifying why they required such documents - a fishing expedition. So rather than obstructing or delaying the PL process, City were exercising what legal rights they had to challenge it. Although City lost on that occasion concern was expressed about the length of time of the PL investigation had already taken and no judicial opinion was expressed as to whether City’s application was, in effect, a delaying tactic. So even on the non-cooperation charges, provided City have since cooperated then for City to be punished for non-cooperation would require the I.C. to deem City’s application to the commercial court to have been an unjustified delaying tactic.
I’ve rambled on a bit and all this is my interpretation which may be incorrect and there may be more to it but overall it’s as likely as not the PL hierarchy did not and do not know what they are doing
Click to expand...
In a nutshell I wholeheartedly agree
 
Kind of depends if your asking questions or fishing for evidence - the trick that UEFA kept trying to pull. Ask City a question and we'll give you an answer. We'd be fucking stupid to let them go on a fishing expedition...
1-6251960203.jpg
 
Gordyola said:
Not wanting commercially sensitive information given to our rivals? Its not like PL is an independent body that is confidential I'm pretty sure that was the Club's case in the High Court case that they lost
Click to expand...
I allowed for confidential stuff; I should have said “other data.”
 
norman said:
Slsbn tweeted saying how we might be dealt with for noncooperation with an extract from the EPL judgement on ”the club” saying far ftom cooperating they were obstructive - in a nutshell. Many, me included, assumed the club was city but….
Slsbn later revealed the club was Everton, and that on appeal the IC rejected the PL assertion of lack of cooperatio/obstruction and stated that on the contrary Everton had fully cooperated.
He caught a few including me, but just shows (imo) why City were right to challenge the PL all the way
Click to expand...
It was interesting that when Everton released their statement following their 2 point deduction they made a point of stressing full Co-operation, at the time i thought it was a veiled dig at us but in hindsight it looks like it was a dig at the PL.
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
It wasn't really about City.

@projectriver having a bit of fun, posted an extract of text concerning one of the clubs sanctioned by the PL and a lack of cooperation, and without naming the club, the inference was that it was about City.
Click to expand...
He's got to be allowed to let his hair down once in a while.
All work and no play, and all that
 
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