PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

wolviedinho said:
Normally I would agree but we have had briefings this week that city no nothing about the case and are very much in the dark like the rest of us.

So either that’s not true or it is indeed another signal that we expect to be cleared…hmm.

Once this is all settled, I would love to know the timeframe and how close our speculation was at the time.
Click to expand...
They might not have had the result but they won’t be in the dark. The lawyers will know how it has gone.
 
Goatmeal said:
Reading between the lines. I think the verdict is known between senior people on both sides. Maybe even other PL clubs.
I suspect they are discussing a way of releasing the news to limit damage to the PL.
It’s ok if city have won and say give it to them. But given we play in the PL there is no advantage to us to damage the brand we are part of.
Click to expand...
I think this is true. They may not have had the full judgment but both sides will be pretty sure of the result. The Comms phase will be in full tilt. Will City and the PL bury the hatchet and try and agree a way forward with a joint theme? Or will the war continue? City may demand the head of Richard Masters. It is complex.
 
Goatmeal said:
Reading between the lines. I think the verdict is known between senior people on both sides. Maybe even other PL clubs.
I suspect they are discussing a way of releasing the news to limit damage to the PL.
It’s ok if city have won and say give it to them. But given we play in the PL there is no advantage to us to damage the brand we are part of.
Click to expand...

Zero chance of that otherwise you can guarantee it would be all over the media by now.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
Simon Cliffe being at the meeting needs an anology to be able to underrstand for us plebs... Why is it a soft signal?
Click to expand...
th-402418080.jpg

He was openly, and on record, questioning some teams motives for recent voting patterns. Intimating that they were not voting for the good of the league, but for "other reasons"
..... whilst wearing these shit-kicking boots!

As another poster said. This could be the opening salvo for more serious accusations of skullduggery and treachery in the future. Watch this space...
 
slbsn said:
It is squarely in my soft signal category. Not determinative but the last person you would send if you thought a poor result was imminent is the key lawyer. And frankly, I doubt he would fancy going. For example the current CFO, Ingo Bank could easily go alone. Or Ferran.
Click to expand...
Pardon my ignorance, but why does sending our top lawyer to a PL meeting indicate things have gone in our favour? Could it not be interpreted as the complete opposite?

I'm not digging you out; I don't know the first thing about law, but I don't see your logic?
 
burning blue soul said:
View attachment 151330

He was openly, and on record, questioning some teams motives for recent voting patterns. Intimating that they were not voting for the good of the league, but for "other reasons"
..... whilst wearing these shit-kicking boots!

As another poster said. This could be the opening salvo for more serious accusations of skullduggery and treachery in the future. Watch this space...
Click to expand...
Stefan said it was his attendance was the real eye opener, rather than what he said. Just wondering why him.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
But neither the PL or City know who is on the losing team as neither have received he written judgement. If Simon Cliff normally goes then its no surprise he went yesterday. His reference to 'Agendas' is as likely to refer to the APT votes as anything else. I don't see it as a soft signal , just City behaving as they have since all this kicked off.
Click to expand...
The actual judgment may not have been made yet, but each side have some of the top legal minds in the country and to suggest that either side three months after they made their final submissions have no idea how it went, in my opinion would be bizarre.

Whilst neither side will want to lose this case, for men like Cliff to still be going to these PL meetings and ensuring his voice is heard at those meetings whilst simultaneously thinking/knowing he may of lost and he is simply doing some sort of grandstanding at the request of City would be weird to say the least, he would not risk his and his fellow legal team members reputation/s in that way.

As @slbsn states a soft signal, with a degree of intimidation thrown in (in my opinion).

Whilst the APT and the 115/130 cases are indeed separate, the signals from APT have been definitely positive, whilst the much more complicated 115/130 is so far harder to discern, in this case I think this ‘soft signal’ indicates confidence for both, again in my opinion.

Anyhow, as we saw in APT, both sides claimed victory and the actual judgment may not be as clear cut as we hope. I personally think we will be cleared of all main charges and hopefully this utter bullshit can be put to bed once and for all, the incompetence of the PL raises my belief whenever I doubt the outcome.
 
mcfcphil said:
Zero chance of that otherwise you can guarantee it would be all over the media by now.
Click to expand...
What if has been leaked to certain parts of the media in the last couple of weeks, and that's why we are seeing some last chance saloon type articles, trying to have one final swipe.

Also, these clubs would be less inclined to leak if they know we've won?
 
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