PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

halfcenturyup said:
On the balance of probabilities, with the required level of cogency. Yes.

The PL provide their evidence. The club provide their own evidence to counter that.
Click to expand...
Imagine accusing someone with 115 charges based on theory of probability, 2+2=5 therefore city is guilty.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
Yes and they have to do that 130 times. So, eg they have to provide transactional evidence of HHSM, repeatedly, over nine years, sending personal funds to Etihad Airways so they could they just pass it on to ADUG !. Or are they going to say they just suspect it happened, based on one falsified email circa 2012. And in the context of HHSM wtf constitutes his "personal" funds. The implications of these unfounded accusations will hopefully have consequences for the likes of Masters and Levy.
And they have what ? 10 weeks, thats 50 days, approx 300 hours, divided by 2 for our time. So in 150 hours they are going to prove 130 charges, what is this reality we have entered into ?. I have personal experience of a case of 9 charges that took 5 months to run and still didn't complete. None of this adds up.
Click to expand...
What were you charged with mate?
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Exactly.

To highlight the extent of this smear, I did an intervention yesterday for a nine-year-old kid who hasn't left his bed for ten weeks and not attended school.

I've built up a rapport because he likes football and changed him from a supposed Red to a Blue, now wearing my kids' old City kits.

Managed to get him into school for an hour yesterday and he said what are City going to do when we get 30 points taken from us and why are we guilty?

The poor kid doesn't leave his room, doesn't mix, but he has his phone and the guilty narrative knows no boundaries.
Click to expand...
Ah TH, what a fantastic thing to do for someone…….saving them from years of pain supporting the red shite.


Seriously though, that’s pretty amazing, welldone.
 
ufo said:
Imagine accusing someone with 115 charges based on theory of probability, 2+2=5 therefore city is guilty.
Click to expand...
That exactly what UEFA did and banned us for 2 years.
Way too litle was said about how weak UEFA case was other then in the CAS verdic.
There realy should have been a condem towards UEFA why they brought on a ban with out any evedence.
It realy was a great day for football when CAS overturned it not bad day like Klopp said.
If UEFA had won it would had been terrible for all the clubs and would have given UEFA the power to punish clubs in the future with out proof if wrong doing only based on theory of probability.
No one in the media talked about the truth it was like "you cant handle the truth"
Everything is in the CAS verdic I have read it 3 times it is very clear.
Instead they said that UEFA lost because City had better lawers when they simple didnt have a proof to what they acused City of.

This is why I belife the conspiracy that this is all from the cartel , from the hakking of the emails, the way Der Spiegel worded the articles, to UEFA banned us for 2 years to these PL charges .
Unless they show me some proof City did what we are aquesed of I will go with innocent until proven guilty.
 
give it to gordon said:
So why do other sports welcome the investment ?
If it's about protectionism than that is no way to run the best league in the world or Europe football
Click to expand...
The investment in sports like golf and snooker have been about setting up competitions where all who are prepared to enter benefit.
If the investment in football was to be about huge money as overall sponsorship of competitions I think you would be seeing a different narrative.
In football the approach has been to buy individual clubs which obviously has a negative effect on the other participants ability to be successful,hence where the protectionism kicks in.
 
rabby said:
The investment in sports like golf and snooker have been about setting up competitions where all who are prepared to enter benefit.
If the investment in football was to be about huge money as overall sponsorship of competitions I think you would be seeing a different narrative.
In football the approach has been to buy individual clubs which obviously has a negative effect on the other participants ability to be successful,hence where the protectionism kicks in.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying but I haven't heard anything bad about UAE Team Emirates who now dominated pro cycling. Never heard scruffy Jim moaning that his team can't compete with UAE after a decade of his team being top
 
give it to gordon said:
I get what you are saying but I haven't heard anything bad about UAE Team Emirates who now dominated pro cycling. Never heard scruffy Jim moaning that his team can't compete with UAE after a decade of his team being top
Click to expand...
Tbf, scruffy Jim is a genuine competitor. He has clearly said the rags should stop complaining about us and get on with improving.
 
give it to gordon said:
I get what you are saying but I haven't heard anything bad about UAE Team Emirates who now dominated pro cycling. Never heard scruffy Jim moaning that his team can't compete with UAE after a decade of his team being top
Click to expand...
I think scruffy Jim likes his pet projects and after a spell doesn't really give a fuck.
Check out "we need to talk about about sir Jim Radcliffe" on YouTube,a critical look at his various ventures into sport and business dealings.
 
There is a little section in the Mail ON SUNDAY headed "TODAY'S GAMES after coments about the Villa v Utd game headed with a large 13 being the number of points picked up by Villa since the start of the season then the same for Chelsea v Forest game with a lage 1 showing that Chelsea have only won one of their games against Forest since Forest came back into the prem , the Brighton v Spurs has a large 110 followed by " Manchester City (115) have had more shots in the Premier League than Spurs who have had the most shots on target (45). .so even in that that there are sneaking in the 115
 
Has there been much mention in the media and by rivals fans about United throwing filthy oil money around?

I've been out of the loop recently.
 
rabby said:
The investment in sports like golf and snooker have been about setting up competitions where all who are prepared to enter benefit.
If the investment in football was to be about huge money as overall sponsorship of competitions I think you would be seeing a different narrative.
In football the approach has been to buy individual clubs which obviously has a negative effect on the other participants ability to be successful,hence where the protectionism kicks in.
Click to expand...
Who sponsors our oldest and most traditional cup competition?
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Has there been much mention in the media and by rivals fans about United throwing filthy oil money around?

I've been out of the loop recently.
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s been paraded non stop .
As has Sky’s comparison of the respective spend of the two teams on display at Villa Park today …………….Oh . Hang on !
 
The UK will host a major International Investment Summit on 14 October 2024, advancing opportunities for investment and growth across the country. Economic growth is the government's top priority, and investment is one of the key pillars of the Chancellor's growth strategy.

Edit: UK debt is currently £2.77 Trillion and will exceed £3 Trillion within 2 years, refer to the IFS.

Yes, foreign investors can expect to be unjustly accused of criminality, with mass campaigns of racial and cultural hatred stirred up by the UK's world-class journalists. This will, of course, be reinforced by the state broadcaster, which will never miss an opportunity to slander, defame, and insult foreign investors — all in the name of good old British fair play.
 
Last edited:
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