PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Asa's left peg said:
They've done their job. Was talking to my sons mother in law this week. She's a Reading fan, so pretty sympathetic to our plight. She asked what was happing to our case and would we 'get off'. I said to her that her wording, whilst innocent, was the real reason all this has dragged on, and pointed out her choice of terminology.

She was embarrassed and apologised. I said not to feel too bad as I have a rag mate solicitor who had suspended the principle of innocent until proven guilty, to conform with what he had read in newspapers.
Click to expand...

Someone the other day asked me if City would 'Get off'
I said 'No' he looked very confused so I continue ' To get of implies guilt, City arent guilty so won't get off but will be cleared'
 
If they’ve already made the decision but don’t announce it, they potentially face the risk of an almighty backlash. If they exonerate us on the main charges but find us guilty on some of the lesser charges, enough for them to levy a small points deduction, it will cause mayhem. A number of clubs will argue that it completely distorted the race for European places.

Is there anything in the PL rules that allows them to instruct a panel to sit on a verdict?
 
give it to gordon said:
Someone the other day asked me if City would 'Get off'
I said 'No' he looked very confused so I continue ' To get of implies guilt, City arent guilty so won't get off but will be cleared'
Click to expand...
200w.gif
 
On the bright side, if we are found guilty at least the football twitter nobs will piss off back to supporting Madrid.
 
BlueKolarovWorker said:
I take a similar approach. Whenever I get the "City will get away with it line", I say "yep, it's like that time you got away with attacking that kid in the park". When they protest that such a thing never happened, I just say, "that's what I heard, so it must be true".

Not a particularly well thought out argument but generally shuts all but the most idiotic up!!
Click to expand...
Remember having a Rag on strings when I used to post on Twitter - he was calling City cheats so I said "You're the **** who abused that disabled United fan in the toilets of the Bishops Blaize that time aren't you?" Needless to say the fucker soon shut up.

Not a very tasteful thing to say to him admittedly but that's what happens when people start lobbing unfounded accusations around!
 
mattcity5 said:
Well they're being honest, I guess that's something.

But why would the media company decide to choose them for the match? They aren't the only people they have available. It's a distinct choice to go against us.
Click to expand...
Ex players are employed by TV companies to provide the viewer with expert analysis and a professional view on the strengths and weaknesses of the teams involved. They are NOT employed to give highly partisan views which appeal to unthinking supporters clubs which are bitter rivals of the clubs involved. Coverage has failed numerous times in its duty to fulfil this basic responsibility, the most notable occasion being BT's coverage of the Etihad leg of the City v PSG leg quarter final in 2016. Wio explained that he wanted PSG to win because of his connections with OT, and David Ginola (invited to ensure fair coverage for PSG!) was asked to explain why PSG were a "much better" team than City and why they would win! The impartial co-commentator then said how he was amazed to see "hundreds of empty seats" at an Etihad stadium that was actually full to the rafters. Wio ang Ginola were, of course, wrong: the OT averse City beat the "much better" PSG and BT faced a considerable number of cancelled subscriptions. in opinion columns many said they supported clubs other than City ( a good few Villa fans!) but was it really too much to expect a British broadcaster not to want a British team to lose in a European competition. Consumer pressure does appear to have had some effect.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Ex players are employed by TV companies to provide the viewer with expert analysis and a professional view on the strengths and weaknesses of the teams involved. They are NOT employed to give highly partisan views which appeal to unthinking supporters clubs which are bitter rivals of the clubs involved. Coverage has failed numerous times in its duty to fulfil this basic responsibility, the most notable occasion being BT's coverage of the Etihad leg of the City v PSG leg quarter final in 2016. Wio explained that he wanted PSG to win because of his connections with OT, and David Ginola (invited to ensure fair coverage for PSG!) was asked to explain why PSG were a "much better" team than City and why they would win! The impartial co-commentator then said how he was amazed to see "hundreds of empty seats" at an Etihad stadium that was actually full to the rafters. Wio ang Ginola were, of course, wrong: the OT averse City beat the "much better" PSG and BT faced a considerable number of cancelled subscriptions. in opinion columns many said they supported clubs other than City ( a good few Villa fans!) but was it really too much to expect a British broadcaster not to want a British team to lose in a European competition. Consumer pressure does appear to have had some effect.
Click to expand...

I remember something like that, maybe it was that game. I remember afterwards things did seem to improve briefly, but more recently it's become kids TV again. Simple dumbing-down of TV and analysis I could understand - as long as it's the same for every team, which it clearly isn't.
 
mattcity5 said:
I remember something like that, maybe it was that game. I remember afterwards things did seem to improve briefly, but more recently it's become kids TV again. Simple dumbing-down of TV and analysis I could understand - as long as it's the same for every team, which it clearly isn't.
Click to expand...
will never change while knobheads like camel gob and spit the dog are still invited back as pundits
 
Haha as night follows day.

The damned united get fucked in Spain by an awful spurs team and the overlaps very first topic is city 115 and Gary Neville saying it’s a stain on football lol.

Did anyone see this coming? I am well shocked here.

Rat **** is the only stain on football. Him and his spitting sidekick sponsored by sky sports.

I like anyone who loves football would welcome a full impartial investigation into any club that can somehow manage escalating debt with spectacular on field demise.

Special Covid and corporate measures taken in order to avoid punishment. Masters and his cronies in the states need to answer the charges.

The question is why does united and the dips and Arsenal want to stop competition and destroy a historical club in the process?

What you are really angry about Gary is that united have turned to shit, city have done nothing wrong but grow a club to overtake the united myth. You like everyone in London, Trafford and scouseland wanted us hanged and buried without being able to present evidence that shows the situation in a completely different light. You wanted us gone for destroying the rags. Admit that and we can start to have a proper conversation about the state of football.

Shitstain brain dead ****.
 
Last edited:
wolviedinho said:
Haha as night follows day.

The damned united get fucked in Spain by an awful spurs team and the overlaps very first topic is city 115 and Gary Neville saying it’s a stain on football lol.

Did anyone see this coming? I am well shocked here.

Rat **** is the only stain on football. Him and his spitting sidekick sponsored by sky sports.

I like anyone who loves football would welcome a full impartial investigation into any club that can somehow manage escalating debt. Special Covid and corporate measures taken in order to avoid punishment.

The question is why does United and the dips and Arsenal want to stop competition and destroy a historical club in the process?

Shitstain brain dead ****.
Click to expand...
Never watched or listened to the overlap but I believe it’s audience is for rags and dippers.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Ex players are employed by TV companies to provide the viewer with expert analysis and a professional view on the strengths and weaknesses of the teams involved. They are NOT employed to give highly partisan views which appeal to unthinking supporters clubs which are bitter rivals of the clubs involved. Coverage has failed numerous times in its duty to fulfil this basic responsibility, the most notable occasion being BT's coverage of the Etihad leg of the City v PSG leg quarter final in 2016. Wio explained that he wanted PSG to win because of his connections with OT, and David Ginola (invited to ensure fair coverage for PSG!) was asked to explain why PSG were a "much better" team than City and why they would win! The impartial co-commentator then said how he was amazed to see "hundreds of empty seats" at an Etihad stadium that was actually full to the rafters. Wio ang Ginola were, of course, wrong: the OT averse City beat the "much better" PSG and BT faced a considerable number of cancelled subscriptions. in opinion columns many said they supported clubs other than City ( a good few Villa fans!) but was it really too much to expect a British broadcaster not to want a British team to lose in a European competition. Consumer pressure does appear to have had some effect.
Click to expand...
Scholes did similar home to Bayern a few years ago even going as far as saying " I really hope Bayern turn them over " ffs...as well as numerous snide comments about the attendance and atmosphere
 
wolviedinho said:
Haha as night follows day.

The damned united get fucked in Spain by an awful spurs team and the overlaps very first topic is city 115 and Gary Neville saying it’s a stain on football lol.

Did anyone see this coming? I am well shocked here.

Rat **** is the only stain on football. Him and his spitting sidekick sponsored by sky sports.

I like anyone who loves football would welcome a full impartial investigation into any club that can somehow manage escalating debt with spectacular on field demise.

Special Covid and corporate measures taken in order to avoid punishment. Masters and his cronies in the states need to answer the charges.

The question is why does United and the dips and Arsenal want to stop competition and destroy a historical club in the process?

What you are really angry about Gary is that United have turned to shit, city have done nothing wrong but grow a club to overtake the united myth. You like everyone in London, Trafford and scouseland wanted us hanged and buried without being able to present evidence that shows the situation in a completely different light. You wanted us gone for destroying the rags. Admit that and we can start to have a proper conversation about the state of football.

Shitstain brain dead ****.
Click to expand...
What I don't get is why he is saying that City are dragging this out. Our bit was done in December, it is up to the independent panel to come up with the verdict.
 
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