PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Coatigan said:
I believe you. But there is no 'proof' available or ou there that people are referring to, or anything official that can be claimed in the way it has been, as proof we have been cleared.
Click to expand...
Goldbridge and that scouse jurno practically said they got one
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It's been discussed many times on here. Under UK law, which the PL have to follow, there is a 6-year limitation period unless there's evidence of fraud.

It's quite possible that the IC have looked at the evidence and ruled out the possibility of fraud. That would almost certainly mean that only transactions in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial years could be considered. That would completely rule out the Mancini contract and the Fordham image rights stuff.

The only thing they could consider is 2 years of the Etihad sponsorship, and they're going nowhere with that.
Click to expand...
Much better put than I could PB..
But it backs up my observational logic that without proof of fraud, much of the prosecutions case is the equivalent of last night's chip paper.
 
Last edited:
Stoned Rose said:
Absolutely believe you mate.

The video the other poster is pointing to doesn’t “prove” it though, no matter what he claims.
Click to expand...
It alludes to it though, which is kind of the point.

Or do you just not like the poster in question?
 
Metal Biker said:
It alludes to it though, which is kind of the point.

Or do you just not like the poster in question?
Click to expand...

People shouldn't get too hung up on proof. The only proof that letters have been sent will be if someone who got a letter shows it to the watching world. The only proof that the club has been found innocent will be when PL and club statements are issued. In the meantime, we can only make educated guesses based on what we hear and, like refereeing, that will always be subjective.
 
Metal Biker said:
So where'd the (multiple) rumours come from?
Why the sudden and drastic change in tone surrounding the club (Goldbridges comments)?
Why no mention of "115" from the usual suspects this week (Spitty, Neville etc)?

The key issue isn't about whether City have been cleared or not, but clearly something HAS occured that has put City in a boistrous mood about the whole affair. Kind of odd that everything has occured within the space of a few days of each other.
Click to expand...

Where do any online rumours come from? Where does any confirmation bias come from?
 
Metal Biker said:
You really don't want to entertain it as a possiblity, do you.
Click to expand...
Oh I absolutely do. Would love to believe it or see something real in it.

But people jumping to claim it as proof on the back of a flippant laugh off comment are just daft. Not even speculating. Claiming it as fact ffs.

For all that remark could be, is a sarcastuc pisstake of the twitter rumours. It means or admits absolutely nothing.
 
Coatigan said:
I believe you. But there is no 'proof' available or ou there that people are referring to, or anything official that can be claimed in the way it has been, as proof we have been cleared.
Click to expand...
What are you expecting? A circular dropping into your inbox?
Wheels move behind the scenes. We are only privvy to snippets and clippets courtesy of TH and some chap that sells motors.... and that's good enough for me as a know nowt hanger-on who's not that arsed to follow things super closely, but will use the information on anyone who crosses my path who has a big gob and a full blown case of ignorance and stupidity.
As you were...
 
Coatigan said:
Oh I absolutely do. Would love to believe it or see something real in it.

But people jumping to claim it as proof on the back of a flippant laugh off comment are just daft. Not even speculating. Claiming it as fact ffs.

For all that remark could be, is a sarcastuc pisstake of the twitter rumours. It means or admits absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...
So do you have proof to the contrary or that TH is lying about the cease and desists?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It's been discussed many times on here. Under UK law, which the PL have to follow, there is a 6-year limitation period unless there's evidence of fraud.

It's quite possible that the IC have looked at the evidence and ruled out the possibility of fraud. That would almost certainly mean that only transactions in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 financial years could be considered. That would completely rule out the Mancini contract and the Fordham image rights stuff.

The only thing they could consider is 2 years of the Etihad sponsorship, and they're going nowhere with that.
Click to expand...
This makes it even more interesting, if it pans out that the the bulk of the breaches quoted are time barred then two questions need to be asked.
1. The investigation took 4 years to compile 115 breaches, so why were the charges not brought forward earlier?
2. If the PL genuinely believe they have a solid case that they believe in then would they be prepared to go down the route of quoting fraud?

I really hope that if the bulk of the charges are time barred that we as a club make a crystal clear statement that what we were being accused of was fraud, and it is the PL who wouldn't go down this route of investigation and not MCFC.
 
No journalist, TV pundit, or Youtuber is going to show their cease and desist letter from City in public. It would be career suicide. They will have all taken legal advice, and will have been told not to comment. So for anyone waiting for proof the letters have gone out that way, forget it.
 
burning blue soul said:
What are you expecting? A circular dropping into your inbox?
Wheels move behind the scenes. We are only privvy to snippets and clippets courtesy of TH and some chap that sells motors.... and that's good enough for me as a know nowt hanger-on who's not that arsed to follow things super closely, but will use the information on anyone who crosses my path who has a big gob and a full blown case of ignorance and stupidity.
As you were...
Click to expand...

Aye, calm your tits ffs. No, I'm not expecting jack shit.

But I'll pull up any muppet that goes out claiming a snide snigger by a youtuber is proof that letters have been sent out which is then proof we have been cleared.

Fucking nuance ffs.
 
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