PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

You need to put your foot down, Brian, like me..

Long ago I delegated all the minor tasks/decisions to 'The Leader of the Opposition', such as where we'll live, how many kids we'll have (even IF we'll have them), where we'll go on holiday, paying the bills, what we'll have for dinner and so on.

This left me free to deal with all of the really important stuff that a marriage has to confront and contend with, such as 'Should we recognise Southern Sudan as a separate nation state?'

Try it. You'll soon see the sense of it.. (!!)
Excellent plan.
Except.
You are still not immune from the dreaded ‘what are you thinking about love?’
Having to make up shit on the spot is extremely stressful!
 
You need to put your foot down, Brian, like me..

Long ago I delegated all the minor tasks/decisions to 'The Leader of the Opposition', such as where we'll live, how many kids we'll have (even IF we'll have them), where we'll go on holiday, paying the bills, what we'll have for dinner and so on.

This left me free to deal with all of the really important stuff that a marriage has to confront and contend with, such as 'Should we recognise Southern Sudan as a separate nation state?'

Try it. You'll soon see the sense of it.. (!!)

She’s got no interest in South Sudan but she’ll blame you making the wrong decision.
 
I listened to all of the podcast inc the Patreon bit. I thought he articulated the bear case well but with far too much certainty around his key themes and the outcome. Plus there is a lot of naivety. The stuff about sanctions (forced sale stuff) and 5 November in particular is extremely unlikely to be true. But generally there is little wrong with his breakdown - I was impressed albeit no real need to listen if you understand the nuts and bolts.
 
I listened to all of the podcast inc the Patreon bit. I thought he articulated the bear case well but with far too much certainty around his key themes and the outcome. Plus there is a lot of naivety. The stuff about sanctions (forced sale stuff) and 5 November in particular is extremely unlikely to be true. But generally there is little wrong with his breakdown - I was impressed albeit no real need to listen if you understand the nuts and bolts.
not invented your own drinking game reviewing all this stuff yet? dunno how you have the patience.
 
I listened to all of the podcast inc the Patreon bit. I thought he articulated the bear case well but with far too much certainty around his key themes and the outcome. Plus there is a lot of naivety. The stuff about sanctions (forced sale stuff) and 5 November in particular is extremely unlikely to be true. But generally there is little wrong with his breakdown - I was impressed albeit no real need to listen if you understand the nuts and bolts.
Can they still shit in the woods?
 
I know I know. I was intrigued. And open minded.

So for the rest of us who didn't listen, please tell me when you say that you were impressed by it and he breaks it down well, that it's not the stuff he puts across on X and he was making no assumptions of guilt in the podcast thing?
 
I don't see how they get past the colusion point that Etihad, Etisalat, all their auditors must have conspired to falsely match. up the reporting of the 'fraud".I don't think they had the foresight to think through that consequence.

On the other hand I do think this has been approached from the angle of we need to find something against City to seriously weaken them and they will probably never get a better chance.
 
I know it’s a completely different case involving different bodies and people and completely different charges and conditions, but Lassana Diarra’s case against FIFA shows that courts are making decisions that football governing bodies are making rules that are inconsistent with the law, especially competition law.
They are getting too big for their boots and need reminding that they can’t just do what they want.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top