PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

jaiguruKun said:
The issue with the West Ham deal for Tevez was they only bought part of the player, the rest was owned by his agents - this arrangement did not comply with PL rules. The Rags effectively borrowed him for two years and owned him outright on loan for that limited period which was OK. When that arrangement came to an end, he was owned by Kia whatsiname's company again and we bought him outright from that same company.
Click to expand...

The 3rd party rule did not apply to United as they did not own him, West Ham still owned his registration But Kia Still owned his image rights this is how they loaned him to United, This is why City stepped in and took him from United, because the rule was changed and you had to buy the player fully and not 3rd party ownership.

City bought Tevez fully and Kia went back to just being his agent, I also think United played dirty with West Ham and they had no choice but to loan him to United or they would have had the Premier League kick them out,

Sheffield Utd took them to court for loss of earnings and won so West Ham was guilty but stayed up because man united make the rules that everybody else has to play against
 
Rochdale Blue said:
I hope the club remembers that while scruffy Jim was trying to hitch free lifts off City for a couple of his donkeys to an awards ceremony, they were hoping they could sue us out of existence, and if he ever has the nerve to ask for a ground share they get told to do one.
Click to expand...
Agree. But who signed it off at Old Trafford. Glazers, Gill or Jim.?
 
Now we know who our real enemies are in regards to this case, we should now be digging up every little piece of dirt on those clubs in readiness for us to drop on their collective scumbag heads irrespective of the outcome of the IC. It's says a lot that clubs that are collectively around £5 billion in debt can tell the rest of the league what they can and cannot do. I think war is about to be declared on the red cartel and it's haemorrhoid hanger on, it's going to get really nasty.
 
Last edited:
bigA said:
Now we know who our real enemies are in regards to this case, we should now be digging up every little piece of dirt on those clubs in readiness for to drop on their collective scumbag heads irrespective of the outcome of the IC. It's says a lot that clubs that are collectively around £5 billion in debt can tell the rest of the league what they can and cannot do. I think war is about to be declared on the red cartel and it's haemorrhoid hanger on, it's going to get really nasty.
Click to expand...
We were too lenient wit Liverpool when they hacked the computers,should have let Premier deal with it first then gone after damages from Liverpool themselves.I bet Mubarak would do it differently now.
 
baggy said:
nobody's suing anybody. The premier league would implode and it's already eating itself. The ESL is getting more appealing by the day...
Click to expand...
Yes been saying this for ages only one way it’s going.Listened a while ago to Lawyers podcast where they had two KC talking after the Leicester fiasco and a legality of the rules regarding
football and they both agreed that within 5 years a super Leauge will be here and legally they won’t stop it
 
Roy paul brother said:
We were too lenient wit Liverpool when they hacked the computers,should have let Premier deal with it first then gone after damages from Liverpool themselves.I bet Mubarak would do it differently now.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t believe it at the time how we let them off so lightly. Thinking of it now the mind fucking boggles! What a bollock we dropped there!
 
Prophet of Doom said:
Whilst I’m confident we will win the case, the outcome of losing the major charges could be endless and is uncomfortable to even contemplate.

West Ham paid Sheff Utd £20 due to 2 players 3rd party owned playing a few games and Sheff U being relegated.

The clubs that have missed Champ League qualification IF we are found guilty will argue they have missed tens of millions - multiplied by 10 seasons. And that’s before you look at those that have missed 1 place etc.

Trying not think about it and hope that like we all expect City win the case cause if we lose it will be chaos.
Click to expand...
Wipe your fanny
 
117 M34 said:
If we are sued by other clubs, can we offset the increased tv revenue deals they all got as a direct result of aguero scoring against QPR?
Click to expand...
What about the bumper TV deal they did with NBC in the USA on the back of the most watched team on TV in the states, Ickle Citeh
 
With every tweet that tragic twat freak reveals himself as more and more deranged

He’s getting that ludicrous I’m beginning to think he might be trolling the tarquins and when we’re cleared he’ll be laughing at them for hanging off every one of his absurd claims
 
BrianW said:
Libellous and defamatory - unless he can prove 'criminal acts.'

City ought to sue his arse off.
Click to expand...
Wonder what the damning evidence that’s already in the public domain actually is?
I suspect that if someone put a scrap of paper with ‘it’s a fair cop you’ve got us bang to rights - we done it’ signed S. Mansour written in crayon, madhat would believe it with every fibre of his being.
 
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