PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

There is an out for the PL in that if we are found guilty of non cooperation the PL can claim that the information persented by City at the hearing if known earlier by the PL would have stopped the whole process. Doesn't really matter if this is true or not because it can be spun and the media would still lap it up.

The PL would still be seen as the good guys for charging City and we would still be seen as the bad guys for causing all the problems for not presenting the necessary information. Personally I would want City to even contest any non cooperation but if I was the PL this is the stance I would take if (and I'm sure when) we are found innocent of all the major charges
 
At 9.01 am tomorrow my guess will also be wrong.

It was the median of the guesses of people that might have known how long these things take.

Only when we have lost all interest will it arrive out of nowhere. Personally I realised about a week ago that I don’t care half as much as I used to or should. It was a nice moment akin to realising that I don’t need or miss social media.
 
chiswick blue said:
There is an out for the PL in that if we are found guilty of non cooperation the PL can claim that the information persented by City at the hearing if known earlier by the PL would have stopped the whole process. Doesn't really matter if this is true or not because it can be spun and the media would still lap it up.

The PL would still be seen as the good guys for charging City and we would still be seen as the bad guys for causing all the problems for not presenting the necessary information. Personally I would want City to even contest any non cooperation but if I was the PL this is the stance I would take if (and I'm sure when) we are found innocent of all the major charges
Click to expand...

I doubt the ruling would describe us as innocent, and even if it did the slurs we have faced for years will have stuck in the minds of fans with a bias and fans who casually follow the medias coverage of us.

If our board thought us to be completely innocent of the charges they should have gone for the medias throat years ago instead of being "nice" about it.

IMHO :)
 
mexico1970 said:
I doubt the ruling would describe us as innocent, and even if it did the slurs we have faced for years will have stuck in the minds of fans with a bias and fans who casually follow the medias coverage of us.

If our board thought us to be completely innocent of the charges they should have gone for the medias throat years ago instead of being "nice" about it.

IMHO :)
Click to expand...
I think the media wanted that hence why we didn’t join in. That may change if the verdict is in our favour.
 
chiswick blue said:
There is an out for the PL in that if we are found guilty of non cooperation the PL can claim that the information persented by City at the hearing if known earlier by the PL would have stopped the whole process. Doesn't really matter if this is true or not because it can be spun and the media would still lap it up.

The PL would still be seen as the good guys for charging City and we would still be seen as the bad guys for causing all the problems for not presenting the necessary information. Personally I would want City to even contest any non cooperation but if I was the PL this is the stance I would take if (and I'm sure when) we are found innocent of all the major charges
Click to expand...
Seems both sides may possibly Appeal whatever the verdict so sometime our main targets need to be bought,?
 
chiswick blue said:
There is an out for the PL in that if we are found guilty of non cooperation the PL can claim that the information persented by City at the hearing if known earlier by the PL would have stopped the whole process. Doesn't really matter if this is true or not because it can be spun and the media would still lap it up.

The PL would still be seen as the good guys for charging City and we would still be seen as the bad guys for causing all the problems for not presenting the necessary information. Personally I would want City to even contest any non cooperation but if I was the PL this is the stance I would take if (and I'm sure when) we are found innocent of all the major charges
Click to expand...
We're way past that point I'm afraid. The other members of the Premier League would be asking questions as to why so much money and time was spent on a pointless exercise and City would be rightly ridiculed for causing it. We would get at least a fine to the value of the PL's legal costs and more on top. Non-cooperation is still a serious offence, it would need City to demonstrate the PL exceeded normal requests by some margin for us to defend withholding information and that plays into City's argument of discrimination.
 
I have used PERT analysis to predict the date of the verdict. Min, April=4, Most likely, June=6 and Max, Sept=9.
The results will be released first week in June.
(4+(4×6)+9)/6=6.166
Confidence level 80% based on listening to the Law experts on here.

Disclosure - just a bit of fun to drive us to 10,000 pages before anyone gets their knickers in a twist.
 
Citizen of Legoland said:
We're way past that point I'm afraid. The other members of the Premier League would be asking questions as to why so much money and time was spent on a pointless exercise and City would be rightly ridiculed for causing it. We would get at least a fine to the value of the PL's legal costs and more on top. Non-cooperation is still a serious offence, it would need City to demonstrate the PL exceeded normal requests by some margin for us to defend withholding information and that plays into City's argument of discrimination.
Click to expand...
How true it is i dont know but the rumour was is that they were asking for stuff well outside their remit not withstanding personal accounts of people, external companies opening up their books, both of which they know damn well they arent entitled to but how else could they prove their theory. We have submitted audited accounts to them for 15 years which they have accepted as being accurate, they then accused of them being not fair and accurate and that funding was disguised etc etc, they cant prove that theory solely by looking at our accounts because our accounts were presented as accurate, the only way they could prove that is by inspecting accounts of outside entities in an effort to prove their theory, they have no right to ask for that information and nor would it be provided to them should they ask and that is where the route of the none co-operation comes in, they were asking for things they knew they were never going to get and then blamed us for not giving it to them, its like me going to lamborghini and asking for one and them not giving it to me cos i havent paid for it and have no right to it and me suing lamborghini for not giving me a car just because i wanted it.
 
SouthStandStander said:
We're only 6 weeks away from the end of the season. Highly likely that's when they will release it imho
Click to expand...
This seems possible. The process is very taxing on those involved and we are in competition. We know it's a complicated case but the legal process should be timely and if they can't deliver a verdict in the season, I think they should issue some guidance.
 
My view is the day the dippers are mathematically champions sadly is the day City get exhortatied from the charges.
As they say good day to bury bad news.

Then we can start hopefully a long painful revenge on those that drove the narrative
 
Will we be informed of the result before we have to decide whether to renew our season ticket. My friend tends to have a pessimistic view of our chances and would not renew if our director's assurances are proved to be false.
 
gocity said:
Will we be informed of the result before we have to decide whether to renew our season ticket. My friend tends to have a pessimistic view of our chances and would not renew if our director's assurances are proved to be false.
Click to expand...
The he is no fan, you support the club not the ownership, we still turned up in droves when we had peter swales as our chairman, if it goes wrong then ill be turning up to watch us in league 2 like i and many others have in the past.
 
chiswick blue said:
There is an out for the PL in that if we are found guilty of non cooperation the PL can claim that the information persented by City at the hearing if known earlier by the PL would have stopped the whole process. Doesn't really matter if this is true or not because it can be spun and the media would still lap it up.

The PL would still be seen as the good guys for charging City and we would still be seen as the bad guys for causing all the problems for not presenting the necessary information. Personally I would want City to even contest any non cooperation but if I was the PL this is the stance I would take if (and I'm sure when) we are found innocent of all the major charges
Click to expand...

I am sure the PL can make a good case for why they had to refer the charges to the disciplinary process even if they can't prove a single one of their allegations.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the panel say that in their reasoning.

I don't think that will be an issue for them.
 
mancboy said:
The he is no fan, you support the club not the ownership, we still turned up in droves when we had peter swales as our chairman, if it goes wrong then ill be turning up to watch us in league 2 like i and many others have in the past.
Click to expand...
I can see his point of view though, we have had two years of this misery which has detracted from our pleasure in being a part of our great club, all the time suffering the vitriol of every man and his dog decrying our fanastic acheivments. To have that proved would leave a stain on us that would be difficult to deal with
 
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