PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[better dead than red]

I notice that crap is starting again next week; my TV guide, mind numbing stuff.

This thread goes all over the place but, never had a show been named incorrectly, on the bits I see of it, half the contestants seem to have flown in from abroad just to take part.

Does the s really happen or are they plants to fluff the show out?

My mate told me about a woman who was a contestant that now does Only Fans. Allegedly. And no, I don't have her name. It really was a mate telling me.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I saw him on podcast a while ago discussing our charges and he's a bigger clueless **** than me.
Anything he's seen is probably from Prick Harris anyway.

Kieran fucking Maguire: "The criminal's vanity always makes them make one tiny but fatal mistake. Theirs was to have their entire conspiracy printed and published in plain manuscript."

Whatever he has seen can't be that "interesting" because this was also Maguire last summer: "I think, based on historical evidence, that City have got the upper hand over the Premier League," he said, analysing the outcomes of other rule controversies, including those around associated party transactions.

This thread has taken a detour into Harris and Magic Twat conspiracies recently that is pretty disconcerting, quite honestly.

 

[Chris in London]

Whatever he has seen can't be that "interesting" because this was also Maguire last summer: "I think, based on historical evidence, that City have got the upper hand over the Premier League," he said, analysing the outcomes of other rule controversies, including those around associated party transactions.

Whatever he has seen, it isn’t in the public domain. So somebody has shown him something confidential. And if they have access to some confidential material it seems likely they have access to a lot more.

Three questions arise

(A) is that confidential material likely to have come from city?

(B) if not, who (with access to that confidential material) did show it him, and

(C) whoever leaked this material, what do they have to gain by leaking that particular confidential material (but not anything else) to a figure with a known public platform?

 

[manimanc]

I’m framing this. Ironically, three months after I got the dogs’ abuse here for raising the possibility of unseen Football Leaks documents, football finance expert Kieran Maguire said he has seen sponsorship documents not in the public domain that are “interesting, to say the least.”.

Of course he has.
And they'd be splashed in every red cartel loving newspaper from front to back.
As if that fuckin moron would be privvy to them.

 

[oldius]

I’m framing this. Ironically, three months after I got the dogs’ abuse here for raising the possibility of unseen Football Leaks documents, football finance expert Kieran Maguire said he has seen sponsorship documents not in the public domain that are “interesting, to say the least.”.

HE hasn't, but if you wish to push it as fact, fair enough.
I've always believed in free speech but also in saying nothing unless I am certain. There is no news, and we will know soon enough when there is news because it won't be in the possession of one self-appointed spokesperson on football finance. It will come from the club and from the Premier League. Anything else is a cock named Poppy.

 

[Brendan110_0]

Whatever he has seen, it isn’t in the public domain. So somebody has shown him something confidential. And if they have access to some confidential material it seems likely they have access to a lot more.

Three questions arise

(A) is that confidential material likely to have come from city?

(B) if not, who (with access to that confidential material) did show it him, and

(C) whoever leaked this material, what do they have to gain by leaking that particular confidential material (but not anything else) to a figure with a known public platform?

(D) It's a faked document to fit the narrative.

 

[Chris in London]

(D) It's a faked document to fit the narrative.

Sure that’s a possibility.

Got any evidence to suggest that either Maguire was lying or that someone passed him something dodgy?

 

[Blue Maverick]

Sticky Vicky needs to up her game after watching this.

 

[East Level 2]

Is this the room for an argument.....?

Do you want a five minute argument or the full half hour?
No, I want more than three fucking years please.
Alternatively do you a 115months argument as 115 weeks passed about 10 months ago.

 

[dickie davies]

Whatever he has seen, it isn’t in the public domain. So somebody has shown him something confidential. And if they have access to some confidential material it seems likely they have access to a lot more.

Three questions arise

(A) is that confidential material likely to have come from city?

(B) if not, who (with access to that confidential material) did show it him, and

(C) whoever leaked this material, what do they have to gain by leaking that particular confidential material (but not anything else) to a figure with a known public platform?

Probably as genuine as Brent di Cesare/Sandra's cease and desist letter

 

[halfcenturyup]

Whatever he has seen, it isn’t in the public domain. So somebody has shown him something confidential. And if they have access to some confidential material it seems likely they have access to a lot more.

Three questions arise

(A) is that confidential material likely to have come from city?

(B) if not, who (with access to that confidential material) did show it him, and

(C) whoever leaked this material, what do they have to gain by leaking that particular confidential material (but not anything else) to a figure with a known public platform?

I can't arsed worrying about it, to be honest. The question isn't whether the PL has more evidence than we know about or if some arsehole has seen some of it out of context and has come to spurious conclusions - of course the PL has more "evidence" than we know about. They have had much more access than anyone else - it's normal. If they don't have more "evidence" after a four-year investigation they should all be sacked.

The only important question to me is whether the PL can prove their allegations to the standard and the level of cogency required. And, on the most serious allegations, I still say no - no chance. The rest I don't really care about

But what do I know, I am just a stupid accountant :)

 

[Centurions]

Probably as genuine as Brent di Cesare/Sandra's cease and desist letter

Even if he did see something, there's no indication whether it's good or bad news for us. It could have been a draft sponsorship for a billion a year from Puma/Etihad/Joe's Taxis for all we know.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Whatever he has seen, it isn’t in the public domain. So somebody has shown him something confidential. And if they have access to some confidential material it seems likely they have access to a lot more.

Three questions arise

(A) is that confidential material likely to have come from city?

(B) if not, who (with access to that confidential material) did show it him, and

(C) whoever leaked this material, what do they have to gain by leaking that particular confidential material (but not anything else) to a figure with a known public platform?

D) he’s making it up.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Even if he did see something, there's no indication whether it's good or bad news for us. It could have been a draft sponsorship for a billion a year from Puma/Etihad/Joe's Taxis for all we know.

As we said when the Der Spiegel stories first surfaced over 7 years ago, one document that looks damning on the surface can easily be taken out of context.

 

[bluemc]

I notice that crap is starting again next week on my TV guide, mind numbing stuff.

This thread goes all over the place but, never had a show been named incorrectly, on the bits I see of it, half the contestants seem to have flown in from abroad just to take part.

Does this really happen or are they plants to fluff the show out?

Not only that, imagine thinking you've got a talent but a TV company deciding that the authority on whether people are talented or not is.......Amanda Holden.

 

[Mike S]

Not only that, imagine thinking you've got a talent but a TV company deciding that the authority on whether people are talented or not is.......Amanda Holden.

Back off pal. I’d very much like some quality time with Amanda ;-)

 

[dadnlad]

I should also like to have it known that the only reason I am a City fan is because of a man called Keith.

MacRae

 

[Mike S]

MacRae

Chegwin….

 

[Keith Moon]

I saw him on podcast a while ago discussing our charges and he's a bigger clueless **** than me.
Anything he's seen is probably from Prick Harris anyway.

Well, the other point I made at the time was that the Premier League might go after Etisalat and Aabar, and that they might not be time-barred. Fast forward three months, and football finance experts are now saying that the Premier League may be targeting Etisalat — and Stefan has since moved away from his original position that they were time-barred.

 

[TShed]

I should also like to have it known that the only reason I am a City fan is because of a man called Keith.

Lard?