BongoBlue
Well-Known Member
Pannick at the Isco! :)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
I noticed today we have 5 charges for not complying with UEFA FFP. Now I know we were found guilty once and subsequently charged.
However where is the charges against Man Utd and Chelsea??
However where is the charges against Man Utd and Chelsea??
The non-cooperation is clearly in respect of the process of the investigation itself. So not sure I understand the first para.No idea what would or wouldn't be our defence, but worth noting we are not charged with non-cooperation for the years investigated. We are charged for the years not investigated. We have presumably cooperated with the investigation.
If it turns out we are innocent, then there is logic in there not being any need for further investigation, and then no non-cooperation. Whether the panel decide that is not the club's right to decide is another matter.
On the second para, the PL will say they were asking legitimate questions and the club was obliged to cooperate regardless of its views on merits. In isolation, this has merit. But if everything else was dismissed, the panel is unlikely to want to penalise the club heavily. Big if of course.
Good thread on what could happen if city win...
I particularly like the last line.. "City will rule football.."
Except it is largely nonsense.
… and breatheIts bin a hatchet job since day one of these charges trying to ruin our great club,trust in club ,its the same shit as the cas case more or less,the one thing i hope we do when we clear our name,is litterally go for the throats of all these fuck wits in main stream media,and them twats on talk sport,go for the lot of em for defimation,they have tarnished our club,theres no doubt about it,and it needs dealing with and out there for everyone too see,go for the premier leauge also,twats like masters blatently in the pocket of the red shite clubs,the whole thing needs resetting,and i actually belive city are going to do that,i think theyve all gone to far with this,and theyve seriously poked the bear
Well i bet you're fun at parties and tbf the best in the world make mistakes pep signed kalvin phillips and tbf that is not strictly true is it, a willingness to go after us and a want to take things out of context are what got us here.They didn’t hire the very best in IT because we got hacked and that’s what got us here in the first place.
Yeah, but he's got an endorsement from our commercial rivals. I do hope that's brought up to show he's not an impartial executive and any "evidence" he has is tainted.Masters who is a marketing specialist and has a degree of geography for sure is a top law specialist :-)
Didsbury Dave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2007
- Messages
- 39,167
What on god’s green earth are you blathering on about? And what has it got to do with my attendance at parties?Well i bet you're fun at parties and tbf the best in the world make mistakes pep signed kalvin phillips and tbf that is not strictly true is it, a willingness to go after us and a want to take things out of context are what got us here.
SouthStandStander
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 2,477
Booo. I was getting giddy at the thought of full on revenge.Except it is largely nonsense.
Do you honestly think we won't do anything if are are found innocent
lancs blue
Well-Known Member
The server is holding up well, 437 members plus 2,600 guests online - eh up you redshirted fuckwits!
The non-cooperation is clearly in respect of the process of the investigation itself. So not sure I understand the first para.
On the second para, the PL will say they were asking legitimate questions and the club was obliged to cooperate regardless of its views on merits. In isolation, this has merit. But if everything else was dismissed, the panel is unlikely to want to penalise the club heavily. Big if of course.
The non-cooperation charge is for the years 2019-2023. The other charges are for 2009-2018. To me that suggests we cooperated to a point, and not beyond that. That was what the first paragraph meant.
The second, yeah makes sense.
i kne albert davy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 12,209
To be honest I think that's bollocks the problem is we've taken the red shirt cartels money away when they thought it was theirs for all time that's the reason for all this nothing else.Xenophobia towards our Muslim owners
marco
Well-Known Member
i think Khaldoon will be swinging his dick in 10 weeks time
Bald fraud
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 5,542
does this still boil down to their panel only having to think we PROBABLY did what were being accused of?
dadnlad
Well-Known Member
they'll have to back up and why they think thatdoes this still boil down to their panel only having to think we PROBABLY did what were being accused of?
thelostoasismember
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2024
- Messages
- 97
Let me just get this straight, The Premier League are calling Khaldoon al Mubarak and Sheikh Mansour and the Abu Dhabi Royal family Cheats, If I am wrong then, please explain what else is it saying, We are talking about one hell of a claim and maybe it's bigger than World Football and Manchester City football club,
This brings into account a Royal Family with connections to many other Royal Families with a status and reputation they hold very highly,
The Premier League is finished and all the other clubs calling our owners cheats under its umbrella should be scared,
I believe Khaldoon al Mubarak and Sheikh Mansour and the Abu Dhabi Royal family will not take this lightly and will demand the UK government and the Royal Family get this sorted once and for all,
As I said it is bigger than just football and the Premier League, Many other things will be taken into account and we are talking about major investments in all sorts of other things outside of
He is a puppet, never an important figure.Yeah, but he's got an endorsement from our commercial rivals. I do hope that's brought up to show he's not an impartial executive and any "evidence" he has is tainted.
ayrshire_blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2008
- Messages
- 6,614
The non-cooperation charge is for the years 2019-2023. The other charges are for 2009-2018. To me that suggests we cooperated to a point, and not beyond that. That was what the first paragraph meant.
The second, yeah makes sense.
Is that not just because that's when the investigation started or at least when we were first asked to cooperate with the investigation? There was nothing to cooperate with from 2009-2018, hence no non cooperation charge for those dates.
Looks pretty clear the allegation is we didn't cooperate with the whole investigation which commenced post Der Speigel. Simple as that and therefore all after 2018.The non-cooperation charge is for the years 2019-2023. The other charges are for 2009-2018. To me that suggests we cooperated to a point, and not beyond that. That was what the first paragraph meant.
The second, yeah makes sense
Last edited:
marco
Well-Known Member
think its been discussed many pages back, but either way could you imagine finding yourself on death row charged and found guilty on the balance of probabilities when your completely innocent, cant be right can itdoes this still boil down to their panel only having to think we PROBABLY did what were being accused of?
Last edited:
WestGorton
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,043
I think it's a facet to be honest mate. As soon as investment arrived from the Gulf. No rules brought in for Abramovitch etc. Obviously you are correct tooTo be honest I think that's bollocks the problem is we've taken the red shirt cartels money away when they thought it was theirs for all time that's the reason for all this nothing else.