I would be surprised if the PL appealed it, if we were found innocent. It would be a terrible look, imagine the optics.
Not to mention the money involved, on top of already spent.
They would really need to be convinced we have done something wrong, or really vindictive, to appeal a review by the panel that comes out favourable for us.
And either or both would Still be a terrible look.
So you expect there to be sanction hearing? ie a sanction is likely even if the result is generally favourable for City?Just to be clear, I didn't insist this. I merely explained that this was the explanation of what The Lawyer magazine had discovered and that they had been a very good source of detail. It does now look correct because I doubt the FT just wrote that without it being told it by the PL at that interview.
It is by no means automatic that this would have been a split (between liability and sanction) hearing but makes sense here. Question will be if the sanction hearing is held before an appeal (if any). I think it is likely it will be but not sure.
I've never fully bought into the whole 'the PL only did it becsuse because the red cartel pressure' logic. So I naturally disagree that they would then appeal for the same reason. But who knows.I tend to think the opposite - the red cartel will insist upon an appeal and will almost certainly get their way, just to drag things out and the PL will get their usual shrills in the media to spin it for them. Look at the ridiculous nature of the Leicester case where the PL criticised the panel they appointed !
I assume even if the big things went our way, there maybe some that went the PL's way ie failing to co-operate with the investigation early onSo you expect there to be sanction hearing? ie a sanction is likely even if the result is generally favourable for City?
I think I’ve seen on here that the outcome can only be appealed if either side believes the law (or rules, don’t understood it technically enough to know which) have been misinterpreted by the panelI tend to think the opposite - the red cartel will insist upon an appeal and will almost certainly get their way, just to drag things out and the PL will get their usual shrills in the media to spin it for them. Look at the ridiculous nature of the Leicester case where the PL criticised the panel they appointed !
We don't know but I think it would be very hard to withhold the liability decision in private whilst secretly having the next phase play out. Just don't think it would stay secret.Releasing the liability decision and then leaving a gap for the sanction would see the world go even more mad guessing possible sanctions than it already has done.
Would they consider this as being a reason to publicly release liability and sanction together if they even can do that?
There will be a sanction hearing unless every charge failsSo you expect there to be sanction hearing? ie a sanction is likely even if the result is generally favourable for City?
That was the legal advice given earlier in this thread on numerous occasions.I think I’ve seen on here that the outcome can only be appealed if either side believes the law (or rules, don’t understood it technically enough to know which) have been misinterpreted by the panel
I dont think the PL or City just disagreeing with the outcome is enough grounds for an appeal
Just to be clear, I didn't insist this. I merely explained that this was the explanation of what The Lawyer magazine had discovered and that they had been a very good source of detail. It does now look correct because I doubt the FT just wrote that without it being told it by the PL at that interview.
It is by no means automatic that this would have been a split (between liability and sanction) hearing but makes sense here. Question will be if the sanction hearing is held before an appeal (if any). I think it is likely it will be but not sure.
Re your third suggestion, I’ve always assumed that’s highly unlikely based on what the club and our Chairman said at the time. He expects us to be totally cleared once and for all etc. So as things stand I’d be amazed if we were prepared to settle on a “partially guilty/guilty of some charges” type verdict. But we shall see.If we win everything I guess its all over.
If we lose everything I guess there'll be an appeal
If its in between I wonder if both sides would settle over penalties rather than go through all the bollocks again.
Maybe only a co-operation charge. I think anything else would be hard to deal over I agree.Re your third suggestion, I’ve always assumed that’s highly unlikely based on what the club and our Chairman said at the time. He expects us to be totally cleared once and for all etc. So as things stand I’d be amazed if we were prepared to settle on a “partially guilty/guilty of some charges” type verdict. But we shall see.
Exactly, me too. Ultimately you are getting reports at the moment that both sets of lawyers are confident of the outcome so how can we be anything else!!!Hoping for the best & expecting the the worst.
I wasn't aware that there were reports out there indicating confidence on behalf of the PL's lawyers?Exactly, me too. Ultimately you are getting reports at the moment that both sets of lawyers are confident of the outcome so how can we be anything else!!!
At the end of the Plymouth LMT pod, Sam Lee said that he'd heard the PL lawyers were quietly optimistic (as well as confirming City's confidence from his sources).I wasn't aware that there were reports out there indicating confidence on behalf of the PL's lawyers?
The pls lawyers were optimistic over the APT debacle tbfAt the end of the Plymouth LMT pod, Sam Lee said that he'd heard the PL lawyers were quietly optimistic (as well as confirming City's confidence from his sources).
Exactly. Also you will know that Simon Jordan said there was confidence from the PL’s side. So he has been given a steer from someone at some point.At the end of the Plymouth LMT pod, Sam Lee said that he'd heard the PL lawyers were quietly optimistic (as well as confirming City's confidence from his sources).
I wonder if it’s like a boxer at the end of a fight, celebrating the win regardless of how the fight went to try and influence the judges and or media.Exactly. Also you will know that Simon Jordan said there was confidence from the PL’s side. So he has been given a steer from someone at some point.
I mean both sets of lawyers were confident about the APT case but that went our way and ultimately UEFA were claiming to be confident at CAS and are still claiming they were right now so it doesn’t really matter.
One set of lawyers will be right to be confident, I just hope it’s our lot.
There’s that but also the lawyers have cost their clients a hell of about of money and they want to express that if they lose it isn’t their fault,I wonder if it’s like a boxer at the end of a fight, celebrating the win regardless of how the fight went to try and influence the judges and or media.