PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[wolviedinho]

And that approach conspicuously ignores the fact, that for better or worse, the modern world which (inter alia) supports the medium within which we are communicating, is founded upon oil.

It makes the world we live and thrive in, go round.

Without it, as things stand, civilisation would collapse.

"I am the Third Revelation! I am who the Lord has chosen!" —There Will Be Blood.

 

[Ric]

 

[Damocles]

Nelsonian blindness.....nice comment. Have not heard that comparison before.

Nicking that.

I see no ships.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

Nicking that.

I see no ships

Hard to do with just the one eye

 

[Silva61]

An excellent paper wouldn’t be constantly producing articles which blatantly belittle our club and be part of a media attempt to ruin us.

An excellent paper wouldn’t “hate” on one particular club, ironically a Manchester one.

personnal It’s a free world but nothing in the non sports part would make me go near such a paper. It deserves nothing but our contempt.

No such thing as an excellent paper unless it suits your personal narrative.

 

[neel]

Shameless level of journalism

 

[jrb]

The headline is misleading.

If City win the case the authority of the PL has been destroyed. PSR is shot to pieces.

 

[Toranaga sama]

It's refreshing to see Simon Mullock quoting Stefan.....;)

 

[Damocles]

Hard to do with just the one eye

I might be getting Clarkied here, or there's a great chance that my Nelson lore is wrong, but he held up the scope to his blind eye and said "I see no signal" (later apocryphal as "I see no ships") because he was kicking the fuck of the red cartel (the Danes) and the shitehawk cowards wanted to retreat but he ploughed through and smashed everyone.

Got to be honest, don't have a history degree.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

I might be getting Clarkied here, or there's a great chance that my Nelson lore is wrong, but he held up the scope to his blind eye and said "I see no signal" (later apocryphal as "I see no ships") because he was kicking the fuck of the red cartel (the Danes) and the shitehawk cowards wanted to retreat but he ploughed through and smashed everyone.

Got to be honest, don't have a history degree.

I think that's where the saying "to turn a blind eye" comes from

 

[Elbow beards]

Shameless level of journalism

But it doesn't though does it, it's 114 months. Fucking brain dead cunts.

 

[cheekybids]

Excellent paper!?!
How the fuck did you draw that conclusion???
It’s a brilliant paper for left wing activists just as the Mail is for right wing activists.
Their bias means neither is in anyfuckingway excellent…..just massively politically biased.

It’s not for left wing activists, it’s selective with its narrative & manipulation of facts to support corporations but instead of blaming migrants it finds another way. It doesn’t blame foreign policy but it will create a narrative away from the real issue.

The Guardian falsely claims….

The Manchester Guardian was founded to promote the liberal interest in the aftermath of the 1819 Peterloo Massacre, and was first published on 5 May 1821.

The reality was that…….

The working-class Manchester and Salford Advertiser called The Manchester Guardian"the foul prostitute and dirty parasite of the worst portion of the mill-owners"

 

[vincent]

Shameless level of journalism

Beyond tedious…

 

[cheekybids]

The headline is misleading.

If City win the case the authority of the PL has been destroyed. PSR is shot to pieces.

It was a ridiculous statement, baseless. As GDM said if City win their case it’s because there was no evidence of wrong doing….. again. A 5 year campaign of hate designed to destroy a founding member of the premier league backed by under-performing rivals.

It’s the beginning of the real investigation, if they have the bollocks.

 

[Stoned Rose]

I’ve thought about this further and it gets worse.

The club has made its position clear. They expressly deny any wrongdoing, which plainly means an absence of any fraudulent activity whatsoever. That is City’s unequivocal stated position.

So an organisation that turns over 700 million quid, that has been accused of fraud by its regulatory body, unequivocally states that the allegations are entirely false. And they have ‘irrefutable’ proof of this. Strident words.

And yet there has been zero input from the press about the implications if this is correct, which is plainly seismic. If the club’s assertion is correct then they have been accused of something of which they have not done. That’s a huge deal by any objective measure.

Think of the Wagatha Christie trial. Imagine one of the statements of case, say Vardy, being forensically examined by the press and the implications for all parties if the court found favour with her case being set out in great detail. And then the only scenario being presented for Rooney was one where her defence didn’t get over the line because there wasn’t enough proof, without any reference to what it would mean if her stated case was upheld by the court.

That’s actually what we are dealing with here. The club’s defence is that the charges are bollocks and yet there has been next to zero analysis in the media of what it would mean for the PL if City are vindicated.

The levels of mental gymnastics and Nelsonian blindness involved here are off the fucking scale.

Chime in again and make it a double self quote mate. That’d top off the best City related week since the 4 in a row :)

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

Copied from X
The real Tolmie’s Hairdoo

A few 'expert' commentators now spinning fallback narratives this week. City always been supremely confident proving these charges are bogus. The Haaland deal, January spending, £400m stadium development, zero to do with the case or knowing the verdict. Media now hedging their bets and inferring City 'getting off' or a paltry fine.

At no stage during this orchestrated smear job, has one single outlet entertained City will (AGAIN) be ruled innocent of disguising sponsorship money on behalf of our owner. They know the verdict is now close and need to make sure the usual caveats are in place, having spent the last five years insisting we will be bombed out of existence.

As for the expected lazy shit that City will have bribed their way out of trouble, let's point you towards the £120m legal fees the Club and the Premier League has spent just to pretend the lawyers on both sides were watching daytime TV for 12 weeks

Just copied TH on X defending our club as usual as we are constantly under scrutiny by the media

 

[Damocles]

Copied from X
The real Tolmie’s Hairdoo

A few 'expert' commentators now spinning fallback narratives this week. City always been supremely confident proving these charges are bogus. The Haaland deal, January spending, £400m stadium development, zero to do with the case or knowing the verdict. Media now hedging their bets and inferring City 'getting off' or a paltry fine.

At no stage during this orchestrated smear job, has one single outlet entertained City will (AGAIN) be ruled innocent of disguising sponsorship money on behalf of our owner. They know the verdict is now close and need to make sure the usual caveats are in place, having spent the last five years insisting we will be bombed out of existence.

As for the expected lazy shit that City will have bribed their way out of trouble, let's point you towards the £120m legal fees the Club and the Premier League has spent just to pretend the lawyers on both sides were watching daytime TV for 12 weeks

Just copied TH on X defending our club as usual as we are constantly under scrutiny by the media

Get into those frauds Scott you shagger

 

[Stoned Rose]

Shameless level of journalism

Pep is a god in this clip. Soft signalling everyone into next week.

 

[Saddleworth2]

The thing is, there are two broad scenarios that would relate to a finding in the club’s favour.

One is that the club has been guilty of institutional and sustained fraud and the PL simply hasn’t been able to prove that, or that we haven’t committed fraud at all and these charges are completely without merit. I don’t think there’s any grey area in between in terms of the substantive charges.

It’s not the fact that the media prefers the former rather than the latter as an explanation, it’s the widespread refusal to even acknowledge the latter as a possibility, other than the obligatory recital of the club’s denial.

It never gets floated, despite the implications of such an outcome actually being more significant in terms of evaluation of the competence of the PL’s ability to run and govern the game.

Even if the chances of this possibility were remote (which I would say they absolutely weren’t) it’s truly astonishing that this (as far as I can recall) hasn’t been ventilated by a single journalist of note. That in those circumstances, all this time, money and emotional energy would have been a fool’s errand.

Not a single ‘what if’ about a scenario that is entirely feasible that has implications that go to the very heart of the way our game is run.

It’s all very bizarre and more than a little bit sinister.

I think the lone voice was Martin Samuel who if memory stans up wrote a couple of articles in our defence. Thats it though.

 

[freshie]