PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

If they are still discussing the hearing, I am well impressed with their memories.

I personally think its gone beyond stupid now.

If the result is known and its just writing it up then tells us the result and explain later.

If the result isnt known by now. Then both sides havent got a clear case. I can see another hearing lol

If City are helping the pl to save face and delaying the result, which going by the new sponsor could be true. I will be really pissed of with that, us fans have taken shit from other fans in the street, the pub, the supermarket, work, at matches etc.

If City do know then tell us fans.
 
give it to gordon said:
If they are still discussing the hearing, I am well impressed with their memories.

I personally think its gone beyond stupid now.

If the result is known and its just writing it up then tells us the result and explain later.

If the result isnt known by now. Then both sides havent got a clear case. I can see another hearing lol

If City are helping the pl to save face and delaying the result, which going by the new sponsor could be true. I will be really pissed of with that, us fans have taken shit from other fans in the street, the pub, the supermarket, work, at matches etc.

If City do know then tell us fans.
Click to expand...
"If the result is known and its just writing it up then tells us the result and explain later." Not a cats chance that any lawyer, let alone 3 KC's, will do that. Every t and every i will be carefully scrutinised first.

"If City are helping the pl to save face and delaying the result," I'm not ITK but there's no way that City and the PL had been given the result before this weekend gone, NDA's or not, there would have been some sort of leak.
 
Centurions said:
"If City are helping the pl to save face and delaying the result," I'm not ITK but there's no way that City and the PL had been given the result before this weekend gone, NDA's or not, there would have been some sort of leak.
Click to expand...

Everyone is assuming that the first the parties will hear is when the draft document is presented.

In a world where lawyers are re-assessing their position on limitation, what's to say that anything else we have been told holds up any more?

Separately on the timing issue, one thing I remember is a report that some club executives were surprised at how aggressive the club was being in its defence. What the actual fuck does that even mean? Just presenting as much evidence in defence as you can can't be considered aggressive surely? What could the club have done that was considered aggressive? Just maybe some things were raised by the club that require some additional, and very serious, "thought" by the panel and that is why it's all taking so long.
 
Now there is a title race, will the verdict be issued at such a crucial point?
We may have to wait until the season is over.
 
IrishBlueSince92 said:
If it's so irrefutable whys it taking so many years for them to reach a verdict, you would then have to ask.
Click to expand...
Because “irrefutable” was being used rhetorically, not literally. It meant evidence strong enough to win the case under that process, not evidence that couldn’t be argued about. And given how long it’s taken, the panel has clearly had plenty to argue about.
 
Keith Moon said:
Because “irrefutable” was being used rhetorically, not literally. It meant evidence strong enough to win the case under that process, not evidence that couldn’t be argued about. And given how long it’s taken, the panel has clearly had plenty to argue about.
Click to expand...
The panel might have had plenty to argue about…or might be having to plough through the consequences of ridiculous over charging by the PL. or both
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
The panel might have had plenty to argue about…or might be having to plough through the consequences of ridiculous over charging by the PL. or both
Click to expand...
Both, I’d say. And if the chair of the panel is who I think it is, he’s also a panel member in a major AI case that was heard before ours and still hasn’t had a decision.
 
Mancity1980 said:
Look pal, play your cards on the line, do you think we are innocent or you are a red cartel bast@rd???
Click to expand...
We’re not guilty of disguising owner investment as sponsorship. It’s a bizarre accusation — why on earth would HH Sheikh Mansour need to top up Abu Dhabi sponsorship with his own money?

We may be guilty of helping Roberto Mancini avoid tax in Italy.

The Yaya / Fordham stuff is above my pay grade — we might be guilty of something, but it feels like a matter for HMRC rather than the Premier League.

Not guilty of breaching UEFA’s FFP.

Not guilty of breaching PSR.

Guilty of not cooperating with the Premier League.
 
Keith Moon said:
We’re not guilty of disguising owner investment as sponsorship. It’s a bizarre accusation — why on earth would HH Sheikh Mansour need to top up Abu Dhabi sponsorship with his own money?

We may be guilty of helping Roberto Mancini avoid tax in Italy.

The Yaya / Fordham stuff is above my pay grade — we might be guilty of something, but it feels like a matter for HMRC rather than the Premier League.

Not guilty of breaching UEFA’s FFP.

Not guilty of breaching PSR.

Guilty of not cooperating with the Premier League.
Click to expand...
 
I'm waiting to see a phot of a good humoured city fan who has recently died having a reference to 115 on their headstone.
'Died of boredom waiting for the 115 outcome'
 
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