PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[mancboy]

Its amazing that after 2 years that some people still dont get it, no matter the outcome we will be guilty in the cartels eyes and that was always the plan because if we arent guilty of something they will have to admit that their money, their 'history', their 'billions of fans' count for the square root of fuck all and that they arent special and just like every other club and any club whether it be us, the geordies, villa etc etc could not only do what they have done but much much more simply by being brighter and thinking better instead of relying on shit that happened decades ago and their fragile little egos couldnt take that, nor could their wallets so they went for yank business 101 and tried to litigate and their collective fanbase and the media who have a combined iq approaching double digits swallowed it up because they had nowhere else to go.

 

[DJBusinesscake]

I agree it's probably just cautionary but would they have sent it out especially after what spitty has said in the past if we were going to be found in breach of the major charges

They don't know the outcome, that's why they're being cautious and using the APT case aftermath as a 'what could happen again' warning. This email could have been sent weeks ago for all we know.

 

[Ric]

So all the clubs can gang up and do what exactly?

Force the PL to appeal, presumably. I imagine there’d be a fair few clubs reluctant to waste any more money on this though.

 

[Fordyboy46]

Would be so typical for a non clear verdict to be reached, and it drags on even longer. I can really see this happening tbqh

 

[Cityfan1977]

people still follow this idiot?

almost 20k people he/she is a idiot but a lots if people listens so this matters

 

[Atypical]

almost 20k people he/she is a idiot but a lots if people listens so this matters

My lad has more on twitch. 20k is nothing.

 

[rice10]

I would love to have the unwavering confidence many have in this forum about the outcome of these charges, but this latest “update” just brings out the pessimist in me.

I mentioned before that both sides were already claiming confidence in the case outcome and the quote in this article that both parties will claim victory no matter what is said gives me the impression that we are going to receive some sort of punishment and will not be fully exonerated.

Now the club have claimed that there is irrefutable evidence, if we do receive a punishment are we to then believe that the evidence was not irrefutable?

I also have one question, say we win on all counts but lose on non cooperation. How can the PL claim that as a victory as I, possibly naively, have assumed that maybe we withheld information originally but ultimately as part of the case everything relevant will have been handed over. So surely that means the PL can’t then claim “well city didn’t cooperate so we couldn’t get the proof!” Because it was all handed over in the end.

I don’t know I am just a pessimistic layman trying to work out what the fuck is going on!!

 

[Ric]

Would be so typical for a non clear verdict to be reached, and it drags on even longer. I can really see this happening tbqh

I’m surprised anyone was expecting a completely clear-cut verdict to be honest, given the breadth of the charges. As with CAS, all that matters is that we beat the main charges.

 

[Manchester33]

Mad that people are trying to determine if this is good/bad news for us.

Sky Sports don’t have a clue. This email will be a standard procedure that most broadcasters participate in. There are legal ramifications to consider (if their pundits slander a company/club).

If Sky Sports had any inside information it would be headline news. Why would they leak it via The Daily Mail? :’)

This is a company telling its staff - let’s not get sued.

 

[birchwoodgingerste]

Same happened in the Apt case the premier league claimed they had won few months later we heard it was city.Same will happen here they will claim its going to appeal ect but when the dust settles we will be wanting that resignation letter of masters!

 

[BAB.DAB]

Mad that people are trying to determine if this is good/bad news for us.

Sky Sports don’t have a clue. This email will be a standard procedure that most broadcasters participate in. There are legal ramifications to consider (if their pundits slander a company/club).

If Sky Sports had any inside information it would be headline news. Why would they leak it via The Daily Mail? :’)

This is a company telling its staff - let’s not get sued.

 

[cheekybids]

I think City probably warned Sky after that Tim Sherwood incident, and they don’t want to risk us taking legal action next time.

What’s strange about that was it was the hardly the worst comment we’ve faced in the last 2 years but very promptly seized upon.

 

[Damanino]

what I hope we get at least one person in the media we will go after and make example of him for all the lies against the club over the years with the full force of our lawyers team.

we need that to happen.

either the pundit talks like a monkey with strange accent of a frog or any of that whatsapp group clowns. that one example can make the rest fall in line.

 

[city2]

Sky sports should have put this out 2 years ago to their so called pundits but they didn’t and gave them cart blanch to bad mouth us to the extremes, just hope City make these fuckers pay.

 

[Ric]

What’s strange about that was it was the hardly the worst comment we’ve faced in the last 2 years but very promptly seized upon.

Maybe the straw that broke the camel’s back? Or maybe we felt more emboldened once the hearing was over?

 

[Blue warrior]

I like that tweet so am gonna run with it ;)

 

[mattcity5]

I don't think you can charge a club with 115 offences and come out with statement.

It screams of incompetency from the board of the PL that they charged a club with that many offences yet couldn't strike one win. All while spending millions of the PL clubs money to do so and risk being sued at the end of it by City themselves for even more millions.

What's the saying, if you come for the king you better not miss?

I think they end up basically saying we couldn't get City to cooperate with he evidence so had deal with limited information available. That way, our non-cooperation throws doubt onto the fire that we are by proxy possibly guilty because we're not allowing the PL to have any access to our emails etc and other required info..

We win on a technicality.

I do think we are innocent by the way. I just think this is how it will play out because I don't for one minute think city will have given the PL anything.

You're probably right. I just think if things have gone our way (fingers crossed) then there can be decent pr for the PL if they do things right.

Follow up what I put with something like "We have a duty to ensure fairness in our competition and the fact we have spent so much time and money investigating this issue, due to the concerns of our members, shows how seriously we take the matter. Now the rumours can be laid to rest, and we know we run a fair competition, with no need for an independent regulator, etc .."

Perfect world and all that I guess...

 

[cheekybids]

Maybe the straw that broke the camel’s back? Or maybe we felt more emboldened once the hearing was over?

I think you’re right about the timing…… soft signal ?

 

[I'm Blue]

I’ll hazard a guess and say the Sky emails are because they more than likely received a very strong email or phone call from us over Tim Sherwood being a ****.

 

[lancs blue]

That sound like we have won some and we have lost some if that’s the ciase we are going to be guilty in everyone’s eyes. We need to be 100% cleared

No it doesn't because Sky don't know the outcome any more than we do, they're just covering their backs in case of litigation if their pundits shoot their mouths off after the verdict.