PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Ric said:
I think the signings of Semenyo and Guehi are more than just soft signals personally. Both players were making the biggest moves of their careers, and had numerous options, but both chose City. These aren't decisions you take lightly (uprooting your family etc) and with a decision "imminent" in the 115 case, they will obviously have sought assurances from the club. I know they'll have release clauses if necessary, but if there were any slight doubts about the outcome they would have turned us down or at least waited until the summer imo. Who knows what the club told them, but it must have been more substantial than the "maintain our innocence" line they put out publicly. Clearly the club haven't been informed of the actual verdict yet, but they must be supremely confident which way this is heading.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but why hasn't the nature of City's reassurance leaked?
 
Gordyola said:
The FA cited the "age of the allegations" for dropping their investigation into the Liverpool FC hacking of City's database a matter that falls under Computers Misuse Act that carries a jail sentence of a least 2 years
Click to expand...
Shame this isn't an FA investigation then
 
Petethemancinleeds said:
Im tired of reading, avoiding crap about our guilt from mainly armchair fans of clubs here and across the globe.
Not one mention of the magician Cherki etc and its clearly providing a barrier to attracting new support.
Click to expand...
I share totally your fatigue with the whole thing. But truthfully the biggest barrier to attracting new supporters is the ridiculous ticketing and membership strategy of the club itself.
 
Petethemancinleeds said:
Im tired of reading, avoiding crap about our guilt from mainly armchair fans of clubs here and across the globe.
Not one mention of the magician Cherki etc and its clearly providing a barrier to attracting new support.
Click to expand...
I like that tbh. It means we won't become one of the overbloated, self entitled, up themselves, part of the establishment clubs.

I have a feeling our owners want us to be like RM, Bayern, Utd. It's not for me. I prefer us to fight against the established order.
 
Petethemancinleeds said:
Im tired of reading, avoiding crap about our guilt from mainly armchair fans of clubs here and across the globe.
Not one mention of the magician Cherki etc and its clearly providing a barrier to attracting new support.
Click to expand...

Not that I’m an expert on any of this shit, but the fact we’re apparently the first PL Club to hit 1bn likes on TikTok would tend to suggest you might be worrying unnecessarily here.

It seems the TikTok demographic have little issue with showing their support for City.

Fact is - most of us on here are old cunts, who consequently give undue attention to the mainstream media. Which is dying on its arse, and is embarrassingly irrelevant to the next generation of football fans.

The proliferation of client journalists in the mainstream media means we get a skewed picture of the general views and opinions on our Club.

My son is 16, and has never even heard of Ian Herbert or Miguel Delaney or any of these complete fucking nonentities whose views get a bewilderingly disproportionate amount of airtime on here.

He never listens to Sky Sports News or Talksport, or gives a fuck what the Guardian’s clear editorial position on our Club might be.

He consumes his football content through Gaming (mostly FIFA/EA Sports), TikTok and Snapchat.

His mates are all the same.

And in that world, Paul Merson or Nick Harris’ opinions are totally irrelevant in the decisions they’re making about which Clubs they follow.

Just because we mostly choose to consume the kind of biased client journalism that is clearly editorially anti-City )given the Clubs who are ultimately paying for it), it doesn’t mean the next generation of fans are hearing anything like the same message.
 
Nicholas van Whatsisface said:
Not that I’m an expert on any of this shit, but the fact we’re apparently the first PL Club to hit 1bn likes on TikTok would tend to suggest you might be worrying unnecessarily here.

It seems the TikTok demographic have little issue with showing support for City.

Fact is - most of us on here are old cunts, who consequently give undue attention to the mainstream media. Which is dying on its arse.

The proliferation of client journalists in the mainstream media means we get a skewed picture of the general views and opinions on our Club.

My son is 16, and has never even heard of Ian Herbert or Miguel Delaney or any of these complete fucking nonentities whose views get a bewilderingly disproportionate amount of airtime on here.

He never listens to Sky Sports News or Talksport, or gives a fuck what the Guardian’s clear editorial position on our Club might be.

He consumes his football content through Gaming (mostly FIFA/EA Sports), TikTok and Snapchat.

His mates are all the same.

And in that world, Paul Merson’s or Nick Harris’ opinions are totally irrelevant in the decisions they’re making about which Clubs they follow.

Just because we mostly choose to consume the kind of biased client journalism that clearly positions its content as anti-City, it doesn’t mean the next generation of fans are hearing the same.
Click to expand...

Nail on the head !

Being saying that for years. My lad is nearly 30, never bought a paper, only watches Netflix etc doesn't watch sky football.

Us FOC tend to give the British press/media to much credit. City play on the world stage not just little old England. Why would anyone listen to these no marks ?
 
blueste41 said:
@halfcenturyup and @BerkshireBlue does this change your opinions or not?
Click to expand...

:) Only a fool doesn't change his opinion as new information comes to light. So, if you ask me if it's possible this case will have been heard without the application of the Limitation Act, it seems that is possible. Although I would like to hear from the other lawyers on here.

But if you ask me if the club would have allowed that for such serious allegations, I think it is much more likely that the club will have contested it and right at the beginning of the process. I find it hard to believe a club who has never been backward in coming forward to use all means to strengthen its position and to weaken the opponent's case would simply accept a situation where fraud (I suppose we are still assuming the allegations effectively amount to fraud) is decided as a disciplinary issue and not as a civil law issue.

This is the sort of thing that keep lawyers well fed, of course. But, bottom line, I would still be very surprised if this thing ends without limitation being applied in some format, at some stage, where it's appropriate to do so.

But again, I take my lead from the lawyers on here, so let's see.
 
halfcenturyup said:
:) Only a fool doesn't change his opinion as new information comes to light. So, if you ask me if it's possible this case will have been heard without the application of the Limitation Act, it seems that is possible. Although I would like to hear from the other lawyers on here.

But if you ask me if the club would have allowed that for such serious allegations, I think it is much more likely that the club will have contested it and right at the beginning of the process. I find it hard to believe a club who has never been backward in coming forward to use all means to strengthen its position and to weaken the opponent's case would simply accept a situation where fraud (I suppose we are still assuming the allegations effectively amount to fraud) is decided as a disciplinary issue and not as a civil law issue.

This is the sort of thing that keep lawyers well fed, of course. But, bottom line, I would still be very surprised if this thing ends without limitation being applied in some format, at some stage, where it's appropriate to do so.

But again, I take my lead from the lawyers on here, so let's see.
Click to expand...
Of course they will have the limitation in their ruling. Then they can say we were probably guilty for some years but weren't able to go for us because of the statute of limitation...... Therefore we are guilty in everyone's eyes. We already are though I know.
 
give it to gordon said:
Nail on the head !

Being saying that for years. My lad is nearly 30, never bought a paper, only watches Netflix etc doesn't watch sky football.

Us FOC tend to give the British press/media to much credit. City play on the world stage not just little old England. Why would anyone listen to these no marks ?
Click to expand...
I'll reaffirm this massively.

My 23 yrd old lad who went to his first game when he was 2 and had to get his Mum to pick him up at HT once as his mental Dad was demonstrating such anger at another shambles of a game (in Pearces mind numbing days with his stupid fukin teddy on the touchline), is geninuly bored shitless of my rantings about how corrupt the game is and the endless bias in the commentary box bias on TNT etc. seriously doesnt give a shite about all of this crap.
 
Ric said:
I think the signings of Semenyo and Guehi are more than just soft signals personally. Both players were making the biggest moves of their careers, and had numerous options, but both chose City. These aren't decisions you take lightly (uprooting your family etc) and with a decision "imminent" in the 115 case, they will obviously have sought assurances from the club. I know they'll have release clauses if necessary, but if there were any slight doubts about the outcome they would have turned us down or at least waited until the summer imo. Who knows what the club told them, but it must have been more substantial than the "maintain our innocence" line they put out publicly. Clearly the club haven't been informed of the actual verdict yet, but they must be supremely confident which way this is heading.
Click to expand...
Perhaps they were told that both of them would be long retired by the time it was released so don't worry?
 
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