PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

The goalpost were moved after we had already submitted our accounts

After the club submitted the first year's accounts, iirc, but before the second year's accounts were submitted. But by then there wasn't anything the club could do, so they were guaranteed to fail one of the tests and the pre-FFP contract costs couldn't be used as mitigation, so there was a huge failure. Hence the big fine on settlement.

It's an interesting question whether it was deliberate by UEFA or not. The club was certainly stitched up like a kipper.
 
original-d7488afacf64caf94b3a8c8ae8314699.gif

Is that Shakespeare again?
 
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Shouldn't this be in the United thread?
 
Harris was made redundant by the Daily/Sunday Mail and now apparently works for himself,so he can now spew as much bile(whether it’s true or false) as he likes.All City can realistically do is take action against the nutter himself “IF” he says/writes anything that’s libelous which he “CAN’T” back up in a court….i think that’s true anyway,correct me if I’m wrong.
Old Martyn Ziegler who writes for the Times responded to a tweet from Nick…………………….hmmmm
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1312.jpeg
    IMG_1312.jpeg
    276.7 KB · Views: 185
Harris was made redundant by the Daily/Sunday Mail and now apparently works for himself,so he can now spew as much bile(whether it’s true or false) as he likes.All City can realistically do is take action against the nutter himself “IF” he says/writes anything that’s libelous which he “CAN’T” back up in a court….i think that’s true anyway,correct me if I’m wrong.
Old Martyn Ziegler who writes for the Times responded to a tweet from Nick…………………….hmmmm

Harris says he was sacked not made redundant
 
Harris was made redundant by the Daily/Sunday Mail and now apparently works for himself,so he can now spew as much bile(whether it’s true or false) as he likes.All City can realistically do is take action against the nutter himself “IF” he says/writes anything that’s libelous which he “CAN’T” back up in a court….i think that’s true anyway,correct me if I’m wrong.
Old Martyn Ziegler who writes for the Times responded to a tweet from Nick…………………….hmmmm
Not that I care much, but isn’t he talking, in what is practically 2026, about a letter he received in 2023?
 
I had the work I did on this verified by this guy: https://www.linkedin.com/in/prof-rob-wilson-a8501428/?originalSubdomain=uk. I collaborated with SwissRamble on the figures.

Stefan disputed it because he didn't think of it.
As usual, the simpler explanation is to be preferred. I just didn’t think it was very likely or convincing. From what I can recall of your theory (I can barely remember it), it would have been very easy for City to win a specific challenge on the point if you were correct. They didn’t even try which suggests it wasn’t the silver bullet you believe. But you may well be right on that whole thing regardless of whether I was convinced. There is a lot I disagree with Rob Wilson about btw so that doesn’t change anything for me.
 
I had the work I did on this verified by this guy: https://www.linkedin.com/in/prof-rob-wilson-a8501428/?originalSubdomain=uk. I collaborated with SwissRamble on the figures.

Stefan disputed it because he didn't think of it.

Rob Wilson is a waste of time. His opinion in the original DS leaks was criticised on here and he proved to be a "rent a quote" for other bs views with the likes of Delaney.

Petrusha expressed it best about Wilson (but this wasn;t in reference to your work):

"Jesus Christ! Where even to start with this heap of shit? I've just looked up Professor Rob Wilson's own description of his career on his university's website. As someone who, in the last few years, has been teaching at a university as a sideline to my main career, I see much that's admirable and worthy in that pedagogical environment. Certainly, I'm far from hostile to academia and I hope that no one forms an impression to the contrary.

On the other hand, I have observed that it's an environment that does from time to time allow utter charlatans to flourish, and I'd posit that this **** betrays every sign of being one of them. He seems to me to be a contemptible rogue who exhibits almost zero real-world knowledge in any aspect of his field of purported expertise, though as he sells himself as a specialist in finance, I'll leave comments on his skills that area to posters more qualified in it than I am.

But as he's commenting above on a matter of law, I am qualified to assess his aptitude in that sphere. My considered view is that he's legally illiterate. It's like asking Jack Duckworth to explain the theory of relativity, but it's worse than that. What's damaging is that he has a veneer of credibility that might induce people into thinking he's worth listening to, and such a layperson, in expecting enlightenment from his words, will be grievously misled."
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top