PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

imo these 6744 pages are the perfect psy-op for people who hate city...for nearly 2 years it`s trending every fucking day even when we won the CL ...it`s constantly reminds us/me that we are perhaps "cheats"...idk why the owner/admin didn`t close this thread over the years/months/days till there are newsworthy developments...every city fan should know what`s up since the UEFA vs city case
 
1Basti said:
imo these 6744 pages are the perfect psy-op for people who hate city...for nearly 2 years it`s trending every fucking day even when we won the CL ...it`s constantly reminds us/me that we are perhaps "cheats"...idk why the owner/admin didn`t close this thread over the years/months/days till there are newsworthy developments...every city fan should know what`s up since the UEFA vs city cas
Click to expand...

You're right—none of us wanted to get caught up in this shizzle, especially since it coincided with our most successful period on the pitch. I certainly never thought I'd find myself studying something shite like the Statute of Limitations Act. However, I have to say, I feel a real sense of pride in the way thousands of us have pushed back against the forces trying to remove our owners from English football.

Despite everything they’ve done for the city of Manchester—and God knows East Manchester needed the help—they've been treated with utter contempt by some very powerful people in this country.

As for this thread, unfortunately, I think there’s still plenty of work to be done before we can call it a day. Maybe one day, we’ll all have a big piss up, and thank the likes of @slbsn @Prestwich_Blue and others for fighting the good fight.

CTID.
 
Imagine how big of a powerhouse we as a club will become after we are found innocent, it could make this golden era look normal when we are finally not restrained like a caged Lion.
 
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
Click to expand...

Naah. Everything about the club screams super-confidence. There is nothing to be gained by saying anything at this stage. The club has the PL exactly where it wants them. Just let them get on with it.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Naah. Everything about the club screams super-confidence. There is nothing to be gained by saying anything at this stage. The club has the PL exactly where it wants them. Just let them get on with it.
Click to expand...
Its not the point though. We may not care, but top end service should care about public image as well.
 
Champions again in 2012 said:
I am not even clear why the hacks get to ask Pep about 115. This should be stopped and the reporters / media told that Pep will only answer questions in relation to the next game. Could you imagine the GPC putting up with this shit?. ... No me neither
Click to expand...
Yes. The response should be: “I am the head coach of MCFC and will happily answer any questions about football. As to our accounting you will have to ask the chairman or Mr Soriano who say we have irrefutable evidence of our innocence. Whether they will grant you an interview given the lies you have told about the club is another matter. Now, any football questions?”
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
Click to expand...
Let the PL do all the posturing and talking. They have to prove their charges after all, the onus is all on them, not us.

I'm sure we are keeping our powder dry ready to blow these charges, the PL, the media and the red club cartel out of the water if we are cleared. You don't show your hand before you lay your cards on the table.
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Its not the point though. We may not care, but top end service should care about public image as well.
Click to expand...

Winning four PLs on the trot, playing the best football the country has ever seen, having one of the world's most marketable players and the world's most marketable manager is image enough for the people that count to the club.
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
Click to expand...

No, the time for talk is after we are found not to have breached their rules. You've seen how Pep's anodyne comments are twisted and scrutinised by a hostile media.

If we started putting any of our case into the open, it would be analysed and shredded and twisted by every rabid looney out there (Harris, Roan, Stone, I'm looking at you!) and just add to their infantile sense of self-importance. There is, literally, nothing that we can say before the judgement that will stop them. If the charges are disproven, the club, and Khaldoon in particular, will have plenty to say. As will the rest of us. Roll on that day.
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
Fallon was suspended by the horse racing authority due to a criminal matter.

Their rules precluded appeals to the administrative court.

Fallon challenged this and given the gravity of the HRAs decision for him he was in fact allowed to appeal to the high court.

He lost that appeal on the facts but the precedent is that regardless of what sports authorities say about higher appeals the facts can give rise to them.


Fallon was represented by………Pannick
Click to expand...
Gets about a bit, this Pannick bloke.
 
Newman Noggs said:
No, the time for talk is after we are found not to have breached their rules. You've seen how Pep's anodyne comments are twisted and scrutinised by a hostile media.

If we started putting any of our case into the open, it would be analysed and shredded and twisted by every rabid looney out there (Harris, Roan, Stone, I'm looking at you!) and just add to their infantile sense of self-importance. There is, literally, nothing that we can say before the judgement that will stop them. If the charges are disproven, the club, and Khaldoon in particular, will have plenty to say. As will the rest of us. Roll on that day.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and besides I think the little devil in Pep likes it with the media.
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
Click to expand...
Er…we mounted that defence when UEFA charged us. Soriano and Khaldoon said quite a lot about ‘out of context, stolen emails’ When Soriano said we would be cleared once we were in front of an independent court, the Times and the Mail called him arrogant.
 
Newman Noggs said:
No, the time for talk is after we are found not to have breached their rules. You've seen how Pep's anodyne comments are twisted and scrutinised by a hostile media.

If we started putting any of our case into the open, it would be analysed and shredded and twisted by every rabid looney out there (Harris, Roan, Stone, I'm looking at you!) and just add to their infantile sense of self-importance. There is, literally, nothing that we can say before the judgement that will stop them. If the charges are disproven, the club, and Khaldoon in particular, will have plenty to say. As will the rest of us. Roll on that day.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but in reality it looks a bit different. You need to be ready for every scenario. Including loosing. Does not mean it would be true or fair, but we should agree, that sentences are not always right. As simple as that. Whats then? You have zero preventive narrative out there. And zero credibility to create one then. Super risky. Mistake imo.
 
Am I right in thinking the date has been moved forward and time it will take reduced a lot so could mean pre hearing stuff has proven or disproven stuff without a doubt
 
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