PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

pepguardiola'smoustache said:
I should've inserted a smiley face and definitely wasn't having a go at you, so here's one for you now :)

I took the second sentence in your paragraph that i quoted as you suggesting they possibly weren't getting a move on and so i was simply saying we don't know whether they are or not, because nobody can state there is a delay when there is no actual proof that there is delay.
That's all, nothing more :)
Click to expand...
I am of the firm opinion the panel are culpable. They reached their decision long ago (which is undoubtedly in our favour) and this absurd delay in its publication allows further unwarranted reputational damage to be inflicted on the club for no good reason.
 
pepguardiola'smoustache said:
I should've inserted a smiley face and definitely wasn't having a go at you, so here's one for you now :)

I took the second sentence in your paragraph that i quoted as you suggesting they possibly weren't getting a move on and so i was simply saying we don't know whether they are or not, because nobody can state there is a delay when there is no actual proof that there is delay.
That's all, nothing more :)
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I probably came across as a bit of a delicate flower. It wasn't really the intention - there are enough of those around already.

I should just stick to being a ****. Much safer :)
 
johnny crossan said:
I am of the firm opinion the panel are culpable. They reached their decision long ago (which is undoubtedly in our favour) and this absurd delay in its publication allows further unwarranted reputational damage to be inflicted on the club for no good reason.
Click to expand...
I agree that they reached their decision long ago but they can't just blurt it out one way or the other after deciding, can they, and then follow that up with, but you are going to have to wait ages for us to type it up before we give you the full details.

You use the word delay, but i again repeat, how can there be a delay if no timescale was given for publication of the result in the first place?
This so-called delay is nothing more than hearsay imho, mate.
 
pepguardiola'smoustache said:
I agree that they reached their decision long ago but they can't just blurt it out one way or the other after deciding, can they, and then follow that up with, but you are going to have to wait ages for us to type it up before we give you the full details.

You use the word delay, but i again repeat, how can there be a delay if no timescale was given for publication of the result in the first place?
This so-called delay is nothing more than hearsay imho, mate.
Click to expand...
our legals seem agreed that 11 months+ after the conclusion of the hearing is unprecedented for this type of deliberation.
 
Just a thought, given how long this is going on.
What happens if one of the panel passes away before this is concluded?
Obviously I don't wish anyone dead.
I suppose it depends on what is causing the delay, if it's just wording I assume they can carry on but if they are still deliberating and the panel is reduced to two members it would be possible to not have a verdict. If that's the case do we reset and have 12 weeks of evidence again followed by the same huge deliberation?
 
johnny crossan said:
our legals seem agreed that 11 months+ after the conclusion of the hearing is unprecedented for this type of deliberation.
Click to expand...
But there has never been this type of deliberation before so they are simply guessing, aren't they, albeit educatedly, but nonetheless guesswork.

I stand by my claim that there is no factual proof of any delay, mate.
If someone can provide proof that there is a delay my drum will fall silent.
 
Last edited:
Question for slbn or any other knowledgeable people on here... How much time will have been taken up deciding a verdict and how long taken up as writing the decision up. In these cases I mean.

I know it's an extraordinary case but what percentage of the time is taken up doing those various activities in cases like this?
 
pepguardiola'smoustache said:
But there has never been this type of deliberation before so they are simply guessing, aren't they, albeit educatedly, but nonetheless guesswork.

I stand by my claim that there is no factual proof of any delay, mate.
If someone can provide proof that there is a delay my drum will fall silent.
Click to expand...

If there were no train timetables, you might be waiting a long time on the platform, but you couldn't complain that your train was delayed.
 
slbsn said:
This isn't correct. There are more likely times and less likely times. It was never possible to be in the first 3-4 months. It was not possible in August. It is not possible in late December. It is more likely now than 6 months ago and less likely in 6 months time.

And to be clear, the timings I have discussed reflect the views of the parties and their senior lawyers as opposed to being made up or riffed.

I know you don't believe it but it is true.
Click to expand...
6 months’ time.
 
asahartford1 said:
If there were no train timetables, you might be waiting a long time on the platform, but you couldn't complain that your train was delayed.
Click to expand...
If it was 12.00 and you knew trains to Manchester typically took 2.5 hours to get to Manchester, the train would be delayed if it was already 3 hours and the train was stuck in Wilmslow.
 
slbsn said:
If it was 12.00 and you knew trains to Manchester typically took 2.5 hours to get to Manchester, the train would be delayed if it was already 3 hours and the train was stuck in Wilmslow.
Click to expand...

Depends on the frequency of trains.
If there was only one train a day, and as I stated there was no timetable, how could I know it was delayed until the time ticked to 12.01 am.-;)
Trains is trains and lawyers, are paid by the quarter hour-:)
 
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