PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Dribble said:
It's a fruitless exercise. Yesterday I responded to a bloke who called us "oil money cheats". I asked him if he knew what the 115 breaches were? I then explained that almost all of the alleged breaches had been thrown out by CAS, so what were the PL thinking by coming after City again over the same allegations, using the same hacked evidence?

He responded with "STILL oil money cheats". What's the fuckin point? They've bought into the Red Top Mafia & Spuds narrative, & concluded we're guilty without even knowing what the breaches are.

It's frustrating, but fuck the lot of em. When this is all finally over & done with, today's newspapers will become tomorrow's packing material. The mud will continue to stick, but I suspect this was the least worse outcome for the Cartel Clubs.
Click to expand...
I respond with ‘thick as fuck’ :)
 
stan bowles said:
Scousers are very weird as we all know. One confidently denying on 'X' any possibility of City being found not guilty with the ground breaking assertion that "City have techniques to wriggle out of any charges [brought against them]..."

Hey everyone, City "have techniques".

Cults, the lot of them.
Click to expand...
There the last set of fans to assume guilt
 
Stoned Rose said:
You can remember that exact quote from 47 years ago?
Click to expand...
Yep, we had to learn several phrases/laws, as I said it was 1 of 6 modules for the HNC, I used to have a good memory but our tutor advised us to write them down on cards, put the question on one side and the answer on the other. Shuffle them, then pull one out, read the question then try to recall the answer. It was learning parrot fashion really but I passed so it worked for me.

One of the others I remember was a case, Donoghue v Stevenson, which was used as a precedent law of Tort, the defendant was accused of being negligent in not preventing a snail to get into the Plaintiff’s ginger beer bottle.

I maybe an FOC with a somewhat dodgy memory these days but something’s do stick, I guess it’s the same with the Ryan Giggs song, “illegitimate”, that’s probably knocking on for 30 years old but we all remember it :-)
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
The hearing isn't imminent according to Martin Lipton on Stefan's Twitter....October / November. Judgement issued months later according to Stefan.

Just Masters being a useless **** as always
Click to expand...
Quoting my own post from the other day but Martin Lipton replied on Stefan's Twitter saying the hearing is October/November. He clearly hasn't got the same information as Prestige Car Sales :)

(Just trying to temper some excess giddiness on here)
 
Prophet of Doom said:
We’ve heard several times over the past few months that certain journalist have been warned by City - only for the usual stories to continue pretty much straight away.

We will know within a couple of days whether there is any truth about these letters going out.
Click to expand...

Ffs mate. You could have a playboy bunny riding your cock and one sat on your chops, whilst receiving news you’d won the lottery and you’d still post on here saying you weren’t sure if it was any good.
 
KS55 said:
Worth a fortune in defamation damages against the maker.
”and, m’lud, it was repeated 20,000 times at Wembley”
—“What‘s Wembley?”
”It‘s an association football stadium, m’lud”
—“What’s association football?”
”Never mind.”
Click to expand...
Shows how thick they are, 40,000 buying these and on TV Wembley looking totally sky blue. Don't think many rags will be buying.
 
Stoned Rose said:
Ffs mate. You could have a playboy bunny riding your cock and one sat on your chops, whilst receiving news you’d won the lottery and you’d still post on here saying you weren’t sure if it was any good.
Click to expand...
He’d be complaining that he’s got cock-burn, pubes in his mouth, and not knowing what to spend it on, but that’s what his alias assumes ;-)
 
Stoned Rose said:
Ffs mate. You could have a playboy bunny riding your cock and one sat on your chops, whilst receiving news you’d won the lottery and you’d still post on here saying you weren’t sure if it was any good.
Click to expand...
We could use this reply as a standard response to any further miserable buggers
 
btpt said:
If it wasn’t 115 it’d be something else. Apparently our football is “mechanical”, according to some random Leeds fan I was speaking to. As if going to watch Leeds play is some kind of euphoric experience.

Increasingly avoiding conversations about football where I can. It’s hardest at work, I’ve got to give the impression I care what some people think, because, well, money.
Click to expand...
Mate, I no longer discuss football at work, & the Rag & Dipper hordes are happy with that. When they ruled, they took the piss mercilessly, but I remained steadfast in my support of City & kept telling them I'd live to see the day when City finished above them! It was about the limit of my ambitions & realistic hopes! :-)

Now City are in the ascendancy, I don't talk about football at all, & they don't bother discussing anything with me. I can see the pain on their faces because they probably think they're such an irrelevance, that they're not even worth engaging with.
 
hammocity said:
Yep, we had to learn several phrases/laws, as I said it was 1 of 6 modules for the HNC, I used to have a good memory but our tutor advised us to write them down on cards, put the question on one side and the answer on the other. Shuffle them, then pull one out, read the question then try to recall the answer. It was learning parrot fashion really but I passed so it worked for me.

One of the others I remember was a case, Donoghue v Stevenson, which was used as a precedent law of Tort, the defendant was accused of being negligent in not preventing a snail to get into the Plaintiff’s ginger beer bottle.

I maybe an FOC with a somewhat dodgy memory these days but something’s do stick, I guess it’s the same with the Ryan Giggs song, “illegitimate”, that’s probably knocking on for 30 years old but we all remember it :-)
Click to expand...
Touché Hammo mate :)
 
Hopefully this whole business is moving to a conclusion which is very positive for our club, and quickly. The delays and uncertainty about when the "hearing" is may also suggest very strongly that the PL's case is either weak or even non-existent. We may indeed be hammering out a "settlement", or even the precise wording of a ruling. I don't think our legal representatives or our executives will insist on the case going to a hearing but they will have very clear views on what they require the outcome to be. In my opinion there must be a clear statement which makes misunderstanding and misinterpretation impossible, that "Manchester City are innocent of all the charges brought against them, that none of the evidence presented against the club amounted to anything remotely approaching a credible case while the evidence brought forward by the club was compelling and, indeed, irrefutable. Manchester City's accounts were a fair and complete record. The club has never falsified its accounts in any way." It has to be pointed out that CAS made a similar statement in its initial report on the outcome of the case there and yet the PL investigation continued, so I would insist on the statement including a warning that "The PL reminds its members that PL rules demand that all concerned deal with each other in good faith at all times and that any violations will be dealt with severely. Repetition of charges already investigated and dismissed constitute such violations". This may not stop the wild men of the media but the actions already taken (thanks yet again Tolmie!) may have already done that. I think City want an end to this nonsense once and for all far more than any revenge which might only arouse sympathy for insignificant (fat) microbes like ? and ? (details to be filled in with several of any number of names).
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Hopefully this whole business is moving to a conclusion which is very positive for our club, and quickly. The delays and uncertainty about when the "hearing" is may also suggest very strongly that the PL's case is either weak or even non-existent. We may indeed be hammering out a "settlement", or even the precise wording of a ruling. I don't think our legal representatives or our executives will insist on the case going to a hearing but they will have very clear views on what they require the outcome to be. In my opinion there must be a clear statement which makes misunderstanding and misinterpretation impossible, that "Manchester City are innocent of all the charges brought against them, that none of the evidence presented against the club amounted to anything remotely approaching a credible case while the evidence brought forward by the club was compelling and, indeed, irrefutable. Manchester City's accounts were a fair and complete record. The club has never falsified its accounts in any way." It has to be pointed out that CAS made a similar statement in its initial report on the outcome of the case there and yet the PL investigation continued, so I would insist on the statement including a warning that "The PL reminds its members that PL rules demand that all concerned deal with each other in good faith at all times and that any violations will be dealt with severely. Repetition of charges already investigated and dismissed constitute such violations". This may not stop the wild men of the media but the actions already taken (thanks yet again Tolmie!) may have already done that. I think City want an end to this nonsense once and for all far more than any revenge which might only arouse sympathy for insignificant (fat) microbes like ? and ? (details to be filled in with several of any number of names).
Click to expand...

Such a statement would suggest the PL themselves hasn’t acted in good faith.
 
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