As previously reported by The Athletic and others, spring was said to be when City expected news on the outcome of their hearing. Their football correspondent, David Ornstein,You might as well quote Mystic Meg as the MEN and that article was from March as well.
The media have gone through cycles asking Pep or not, if they had been briefed that it's soon, I'd have thought that would have ramped up the questions. It sometimes feels like the chicken & the egg regarding this, someone posts on here that they've heard something and the media seem to pick up on it and start writing about it again. Or the other way around.
The only thing for sure is that it's closer than it was.
I think United may support City in any battle. Ratcliffe is no fan of PSR and United are in a desperate financial situation. No one will buy them out if they can't invest serious money in the product. They are struggling for investment. Of course the Glazers don't want to spend their own money. The Rags thought FFP would kill City but now PSR is strangling them. Happy days.I was wondering how many of those would still be against City in 2025 too. A reminder of the 9 clubs and whether I think they have the same sentiments.
Arsenal - Yes
Man Utd - Yes (though some would say, this is not a given)
Liverpool - Yes
Tottenham - Yes
Chelsea - Not sure
Leicester - Probably not
Newcastle - No
Burnley - Probably not
Wolves - Not sure.
I think the verdict was reached and the report was completed months ago. The report is filed away and everyone has forgot about it.are you sure about that? maybe it was announced as tiny article hidden in the middle of the paper months ago and everyone missed it. in which case its further away than it was. had you considered that?
Your last sentence says it all but perhaps even the Panel have had to adjust things as they go along so that their 2 years has needed extending, a bit like a construction project over running and/or over spending.You might as well quote Mystic Meg as the MEN and that article was from March as well.
The media have gone through cycles asking Pep or not, if they had been briefed that it's soon, I'd have thought that would have ramped up the questions. It sometimes feels like the chicken & the egg regarding this, someone posts on here that they've heard something and the media seem to pick up on it and start writing about it again. Or the other way around.
The only thing for sure is that it's closer than it was.
I expect Bobby Ewing to emerge out of the shower and announce the verdict.I think the verdict was reached and the report was completed months ago. The report is filed away and everyone has forgot about it.
Maybe they’re going to try and develop one of those mind-wiping devices from Men In Black.I think the verdict was reached and the report was completed months ago. The report is filed away and everyone has forgot about it.
And we all lived happily ever after.
I was wondering how many of those would still be against City in 2025 too. A reminder of the 9 clubs and whether I think they have the same sentiments.
Arsenal - Yes
Man Utd - Yes (though some would say, this is not a given)
Liverpool - Yes
Tottenham - Yes
Chelsea - Not sure
Leicester - Probably not
Newcastle - No
Burnley - Probably not
Wolves - Not sure.
Every club will vote in the interests of themselves ALL THE TIME.
I think United may support City in any battle. Ratcliffe is no fan of PSR and United are in a desperate financial situation. No one will buy them out if they can't invest serious money in the product. They are struggling for investment. Of course the Glazers don't want to spend their own money. The Rags thought FFP would kill City but now PSR is strangling them. Happy days.
I’d say Chelsea are a definite ‘Yes’. I agree with the rest though. A post which was so good I liked it.I was wondering how many of those would still be against City in 2025 too. A reminder of the 9 clubs and whether I think they have the same sentiments.
Arsenal - Yes
Man Utd - Yes (though some would say, this is not a given)
Liverpool - Yes
Tottenham - Yes
Chelsea - Not sure
Leicester - Probably not
Newcastle - No
Burnley - Probably not
Wolves - Not sure.
In other words ‘they are fucked’.It’s a catch 22 situation for the rags, if they bin psr off and open up unlimited spending it might solve their desperate squad rebuild problems. However what it also does is open up opportunities for other clubs to spend crazy amounts such as Newcastle which then leaves United open to bidding wars with clubs like City and Newcastle who’s owners have got the money to spend at hand if needed.
I think the verdict was reached and the report was completed months ago. The report is filed away and everyone has forgot about it.
And we all lived happily ever after.
I think the PL are praying for one of those endings ...... or masters walks out of the shower after a dream sceneMaybe they’re going to try and develop one of those mind-wiping devices from Men In Black.
There's UEFA's FFP regulations, so no one is going to go mental with the chequebook, or in the rags case, the credit cardIt’s a catch 22 situation for the rags, if they bin psr off and open up unlimited spending it might solve their desperate squad rebuild problems. However what it also does is open up opportunities for other clubs to spend crazy amounts such as Newcastle which then leaves United open to bidding wars with clubs like City and Newcastle who’s owners have got the money to spend at hand if needed.
Because we don't need to. We haven't had any issues with meeting PSR for a number of seasonsWhy dont we just sell our womens team to ourselves like Chelsea did?
There are no factual challenges of that type. It’s more name errors, a spelling mistake, a missed operative word that was clearly meant to be there. It is not to relitigate any finding. It could be a longer embargo period but they will be very mindful of the leak risk.@slbsn quick question.
If the embargo period is for both parties to highlight factual errors etc, is that period set in stone?
Reason I ask, let’s say it’s a week, and let’s say one of the parties points out a factual error that requires the panel to review notes from the session in question. That would take time.
Then the length of report means likelihood for higher volume of factual challenges.
The nature of the challenge also a factor? Big difference between spelling someone’s name incorrectly versus a witness claiming they didn’t say what is written in the report (or at least that it’s ambiguous enough to risk misinterpretation by the reader).
Then presumably the report would have to be updated as necessary and reissued to the parties?
In other words, could the embargo period last for a much longer period of time?
Because we're fucking loaded and don't need toWhy dont we just sell our womens team to ourselves like Chelsea did?
It’s imminent."As I and others have reported previously, the expectation at City has been 'spring', and if that's the case, we're there now... however it would also mean we could be waiting until late June!https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...all-news/man-city-115-premier-league-31306844
In the next 10 days, looks like the media has been briefed. They stopped asking Pep about it in his press conferences