PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

johnny crossan said:
Which part of it explains why?
Click to expand...

Tbf, I think we all understood why it would take a long time. Personally, I would suggest the time taken doesn't depend the outcome (unless the allegations were dismissed out of hand, which was never likely to happen): it's a highly sensitive and politicised case whichever way the judgment hangs: either accusing international politicians and businessmen of fraud or denying a group of clubs (those that pretty much run the PL) the right to claim tens or hundreds of millions in compensation. The judgment will have to stand up to intense scrutiny whichever way it falls. So I'm not sure anything can be read into the time it's taking.

I also think we now all agree that it has taken longer than "expected" because of "unknown reasons". It has taken some of us longer to come to that conclusion than it has others, but that is normal. It would be beneficial to have some discussion of what these unknown reasons could be. Again imh and poorly-informed o, any complicated legal issue can be discounted in this case. At it's heart, it's quite simple isn't it? The APT case was much more complicated, surely? Health issues of a panel member can't be discounted, but would surely be known about in legal circles. Case load? Again, that wouldn't be unknown, would it? I really can't imagine lawyers working every day in that environment haven't worked out yet who the three panel members are. So what is left?
 
Centurions said:
Do you honestly believe that if that was the case, that the club wouldn't be aware? Why would we not just say "sod that for a game of soldiers" and release everything?
Click to expand...

Same reason the club settled the APT2 case when the PL was clearly on the back foot?

Btw, I am not saying that is what is happening. But I am not saying it's not, either.
 
Centurions said:
Do you honestly believe that if that was the case, that the club wouldn't be aware? Why would we not just say "sod that for a game of soldiers" and release everything?
Click to expand...
We are part of the PL going forward and it's in our interest to ensure its success. We seem to be prepared to allow extra time for an improved structure be established even at a cost of additional reputational damage in the meantime.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Tbf, I think we all understood why it would take a long time. Personally, I would suggest the time taken doesn't depend the outcome (unless the allegations were dismissed out of hand, which was never likely to happen): it's a highly sensitive and politicised case whichever way the judgment hangs: either accusing international politicians and businessmen of fraud or denying a group of clubs (those that pretty much run the PL) the right to claim tens or hundreds of millions in compensation. The judgment will have to stand up to intense scrutiny whichever way it falls. So I'm not sure anything can be read into the time it's taking.

I also think we now all agree that it has taken longer than "expected" because of "unknown reasons". It has taken some of us longer to come to that conclusion than it has others, but that is normal. It would be beneficial to have some discussion of what these unknown reasons could be. Again imh and poorly-informed o, any complicated legal issue can be discounted in this case. At its heart, it's quite simple isn't it? The APT case was much more complicated, surely? Health issues of a panel member can't be discounted, but would surely be known about in legal circles. Case load? Again, that wouldn't be unknown, would it? I really can't imagine lawyers working every day in that environment haven't worked out yet who the three panel members are. So what is left?
Click to expand...
A lawyer for example will try to explain the case from his/her legal background. An accountant will do the same but and it’s a big but…football is like the Wild West, so many vested interests and so many creative way to stifle or grow a club. Apt and shareholder loans…

This is why imo posters can be at loggerheads. You need to find room for illogical thinking/reasoning/decision making.

The case should have been concluded. The accounts should have been enough to dismiss fraud. None of this has happened.The why question is more important now than ever. Guilt or innocence is not important.

I go back to power brokers from the league and Abu Dhabi finding an agreement to end this. The 3 man panel is a sideshow.

It might not make sense and it is probably immoral and simplistic. You can’t dismiss the law of the land, football can and does…
 
Last edited:
I would like the verdict around 10am on Monday followed by Simon Jordan being served legal papers live on air via an official city representative discussing the result.

Is that too much to ask IF we're successful?

If not, the club might have to think their ticketing strategy when we move into the Joie to save money.
:)
 
TinFoilHat said:
If not, the club might have to think their ticketing strategy when we move into the Joie to save money.
Click to expand...

Might be a goer if the women's team get the super Asda/Tesco/creche they are asking for, we should be grateful although they might have to build a few more toilets and a smoking area :)
 
Kazzydeyna said:
Out of interest just been looking at your recent post history.

You are one miserable, glass half empty, old curmudgeon. You seem to get off on negativity.
Click to expand...

FFS don't look mine up I make him look positively fucking jovial.
 
We all knew that it would take a while of course, what's embarrassing for certain people is quite how badly they have misjudged how long it'd take.
 
tumblr_p5r2bx6i0B1ukq7ljo4_540.gif


Meanwhile at PL headquarters the news is about to break.
 
johnny crossan said:
The 'Why' was omitted from the title for a reason. I once encountered a 240 page structuralist explanation of making a cup of tea - all of the panel process should have been contained within a reasonable timeframe and it hasn't. There are clearly extra factors in play here which are not described in the article of which the primary one I believe is PL lobbying for time to organise their damage limitation exercise. At a cost of further unnecessary reputational damage to us btw.
Click to expand...

Sure.
 
brian the blue said:
It doesn’t take this long to write up that we’re innocent.

We could be in for a horror show of a verdict when it finally drops.
Click to expand...

You could easily argue the opposite. If we are innocent, it will get micro examined by more people than if we are guilty and so will need to be correct on every tiny detail.

Or it’s the same either way. It is a colossal task and needs doing properly.
 
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