PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Saddleworth2 said:
I hope once we are cleared the club really goes for the jugular of those guilty of these fabrications, lies and malicious rumours. This has been hanging over the fanbase like a putrid black cloud since 2018 when the bloody leaks occurred. 2014 if you count the original Uefa charges. The best way of rebuilding our tarnished reputation is to expose the deliberate efforts to drag our name through the mud.
Cheats they call us. Cheats. That is one of the worst insults I can think of.
Should that go unpunished? Should we just accept a legal verdict and turn the cheek and continue to let them say 'we got off with it'?

Fuck that.
In times of disagreement and conflict I ask myself what would Maximus do in this situation?

'We will have our vengeance in this life or the next'.

View attachment 149251

:-)
Click to expand...
Rather than Lord Pannick it might have been more beneficial to just hire an assassin

The facts would still determine the judgement but at least we'd get a fair press prior to the final announcement
 
Last edited:
jrb said:
It's probably already been posted, but if anyone hasn't seen it yet?

Click to expand...


Not a response to you jrb, but to some of the content in the video you posted.

When @slbsn says it could be a lengthy process to then determine potential penalties, if this verdict determines liability, did I misunderstand that you then say it could be a further coulle weeks after that? Is that really a lengthy timescale or did I get that wrong. Think if they detemine we are guilty and then a couple weeks later they decide the appropriate penalty, I would argue that was quick.

Interesting point on the sequence of potential appeals. Guess that answers a question I asked before. I don't however (not in a legal sense, but a general one) see the logic of waiting till a penalty is announced to potentially appeal both. Does that not raise the issue of what happens of the appeal says there is no liability as the penalty is being drafted etc. Surely it would make sense for one to be appealed first and any penalties to wait for that, than try run them simultaneously, or together. Unless it is the same body that deals with both, but then it is kind of loading their decision already potentially.
 
Coatigan said:
Not a response to you jrb, but to some of the content in the video you posted.

When @slbsn says it could be a lengthy process to then determine potential penalties, if this verdict determines liability, did I misunderstand that you then say it could be a further coulle weeks after that? Is that really a lengthy timescale or did I get that wrong. Think if they detemine we are guilty and then a couple weeks later they decide the appropriate penalty, I would argue that was quick.

Interesting point on the sequence of potential appeals. Guess that answers a question I asked before. I don't however (not in a legal sense, but a general one) see the logic of waiting till a penalty is announced to potentially appeal both. Does that not raise the issue of what happens of the appeal says there is no liability as the penalty is being drafted etc. Surely it would make sense for one to be appealed first and any penalties to wait for that, than try run them simultaneously, or together. Unless it is the same body that deals with both, but then it is kind of loading their decision already potentially.
Click to expand...

I think the point is that the sanctions hearing could be a couple of weeks, but it would have to get scheduled with everyone's diaries. We have seen with the APT case, that that can take weeks and then there will be weeks before the award is finally drafted and approved for publication. So you are looking at a few months, not a couple of weeks.

On the appeal point, I don't think the hearings will run in parallel: they will run sequentially. The question is if the liability award can be appealed before the sanctions are determined (with the possibility of a second appeal on the sanctions) or whether the first panel will finish liability and sanctions completely with an appeal possible on both at the same time. The thinking is the latter is most likely, if only because it will be quicker and it would be a very strange case of affairs to have the liability award being published by the disciplinary panel, it being successfully appealed in front of an appeals panel and then pushed back to the original panel for sanction on the amended liability decision. Pretty disrespectful to the disciplinary panel, imho.

Did any of that make sense?
 
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