PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

mcfcphil said:
@gordondaviesmoustache
Completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things but.. when I see lawyers using a trolley to wheel massive boxes of legal papers into the courtroom I always wonder why they don’t save themselves the bother and use digital versions.

Presumably would also be much easier to use within proceedings as well if you can just open a file instead of sifting through thousands of docs.

Maybe it’s a bit grandstanding on the courtroom precinct.
Click to expand...
Some people prefer the tactility and flexibility of paper, especially as it’s a known quantity and a medium they’ve operated with for many years. If those papers are ours then I guess Pannick will prefer operating that way, and like a chef with his knives he will want it ‘just so’ in his workplace, so he can perform to his best. It’s his case to run as he sees fit.

Things are more digitalised now, but it’s not obligatory upon the person conducting the case, although they will still need to use that platform more widely in the hearing, such as with witnesses.

Don’t think there’s any grandstanding, as it looks a bit daft and anachronistic imo.
 
wolviedinho said:
No we don’t… allegedly-:)


Don’t buy the opinion that you have to abide by protectionist rules. City today in its current form would be Newcastle or worse Everton.

The club had no choice but to sign up and to find ways around it.
Click to expand...
To many City fans, their so called rules, seem to be one rule for one one rule for another. Where were these rules when Chelsea were spending their way to success, or when ushited and Liverpool spent what they liked in the nineties. The rules only came in when City got the money to challenge. But we got in too late for their rules to stop us so they have had to resort to what is happening now.
 
Last edited:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Some people prefer the tactility and flexibility of paper, especially as it’s a known quantity and a medium they’ve operated with for many years. If those papers are ours then I guess Pannick will prefer operating that way, and like a chef with his knives he will want it ‘just so’ in his workplace, so he can perform to his best. It’s his case to run as he sees fit.

Things are more digitalised now, but it’s not obligatory upon the person conducting the case, although they will still need to use that platform more widely in the hearing, such as with witnesses.

Don’t think there’s any grandstanding, as it looks a bit daft and anachronistic imo.
Click to expand...
Interesting cheers
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Some people prefer the tactility and flexibility of paper, especially as it’s a known quantity and a medium they’ve operated with for many years. If those papers are ours then I guess Pannick will prefer operating that way, and like a chef and his knives he will want it ‘just so’ in his workplace, so he can perform to his best. It’s his case to run as he sees fit.

Things are more digitalised now, but it’s not obligatory upon the person conducting the case, although they will still need to use that platform more widely in the hearing, such as with witnesses.

Don’t think there’s any grandstanding, as it looks a bit daft imo.
Click to expand...

"Digitalised"?
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
The Telegraph article is saying that we would be looking at being thrown out of the CL, Club World Cup as well as the domestic cups.

Blimey
Click to expand...
And tea cups, the Telegraph has hated us since they moved into football, it is a desperate attempt to garner readers from a source they had little time for. Pay it no attention.
 
IrishBlueSince92 said:
Shut down the hearing, the Dunney Monster says we’ve nothing to worry about

Click to expand...

I love it that these idiots say well City can afford the best lawyers. So fucking what, do they expect City to hire Saul Goodman to defend us. Having good lawyers is not an admission of guilt.
 
jrb said:
Mistake or not, what the 2 ex City staff members did was known about by LFC and no action was taken against the 2 ex City staff members by LFC. People can make up their own minds about the way LFC acted.

Sporting director Michael Edwards and two former City employees, Julian Ward and Dave Fallows, were named in the subsequent settlement.

Julian Ward has returned to LFC and taken a position with Fenway Sports Group as technical director. This year.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah it's shitty from Liverpool which is why they paid us a million quid. Just think we didn't pursue it as it kind of made us look bad aswell.
 
eastmanc said:
I love it that these idiots say well City can afford the best lawyers. So fucking what, do they expect City to hire Saul Goodman to defend us. Having good lawyers is not an admission of guilt.
Click to expand...

It's pre-empting the decision by suggesting we wouldn't have "got off" without the best lawyers and we are effectively guilty by default.

After the tribunal and the papal smoke announces our innocence it will be reported by everyone that we are pretty much guilty any way.

We are killing football by not curling up into a ball and accepting the turnip eating mob to kick the fucking shit out of us without raising an arm to fight back.
 
jrb said:
Let’s be honest. If City wanted to take the Scouse hacking further, they could have. City decided to settle out of court with a pay off. We’ll never know the reason why. The PL were happy with that. City could have absolutely slaughtered Henry and Liverpool in court. But City decided not to do that. Yet all along Henry and Liverpool have been behind the constant and under handed smear campaign and attacks against City. Very strange decision by City.
Click to expand...
And probably still lost the PR war. Which is why I reckon they settled
 
Metal Biker said:
What would be the point of settling in that instance? They more than likely offered the "low" settlement as a way of the PL saving face and ending the whole farce they'd forced upon themselves, thinking City were soft targets and would happily accept just to get it over with.

But our owners have integrity and this is their reputation being slandered, so no surprise we said no to any "offer" they proposed. That makes more sense to me.
Click to expand...

Sorry no, my initial understanding (which I've been put right on and realise likely isn't the case) was a hopeful one that the PL, perhaps for reasons of sketchy evidence and huge financial costs to them in running the case, would drop the fraud/concealment and thus exonerate the club of these serious charges in exchange for settlement of less serious stuff which would carry a lower penalty, in this case 6 points and a fine.

Understand now that's likely not the case so happy to move on, but that was my initial take on PB's post.
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
The Telegraph article is saying that we would be looking at being thrown out of the CL, Club World Cup as well as the domestic cups.

Blimey
Click to expand...
It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest for them to try.
It become apparent very early on that everyone doesn’t just want us punished, they want us gone, permanently!
FFP/PSR is supposed to protect clubs from going out of business.
Well that’s what they told us, right?
So I have to ask..
WHERE THE FUCK IS OUR PROTECTION?
 
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