PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I still believe the information that the PL came out of the hearing badly. It's hard to see how it didn't to be honest. As has been said before, if they were confident in the main thrust of the charges around sponsorships, I doubt they would have brought the Mancini allegations to the table.

Stefan, Chris and others who are far better qualified than me in legal matters have said they believe the PL would struggle to land the charges, even on the reduced level of balance of probabilities. But if we, in our discovery process, have uncovered uncomfortable or damning evidence on how this whole farce came about, then that's a different matter entirely.

They came out of the APT case badly so the bigger the case the bigger the corruption, the worst they are going to look. Especially when so many have pinned all their hopes on them.
 
You can read the pain and bitterness in-between the lines from an Arsenal fan.

Arsenal honest? Lol!

View attachment 190714
"Your team is beating my team, who used to beat everyone else to trophies, which was fine, but aren't anymore, so it's wrong!"

Cognitive awareness not firing on all cylinders with this one.
 
Are you still confident in your source's information from last year that the PL came out of the hearing badly and the "delay" is due to some negotiated damage control, PB? Or have you been beaten down by He Who Must Be Believed?

Asking only because, even if @Chris in London has pooh-poohed my wonderfully constructed theory that there is some connection to the APT case, the common wisdom on timing (this summer) is still "coincidentally" the same time as PSR gets officially kicked out. I was just wondering if that could be connected somehow.
I only poo pooed it because it was shit
 
They came out of the APT case badly so the bigger the case the bigger the corruption, the worst they are going to look. Especially when so many have pinned all their hopes on them.
What the APT case proved, among other things, was that they were perfectly capable of caving into pressure from club chairmen even when they knew that pressure was to implement, or ignore, illegal actions.
 
So you weren’t wrong?

Got you
Why are you even phrasing that as a question? I already said I wasn’t wrong — where exactly do you think the ambiguity is hiding? But hey, you eventually caught up, so let’s just pretend this was a learning experience for you.
 
Why are you even phrasing that as a question? I already said I wasn’t wrong — where exactly do you think the ambiguity is hiding? But hey, you eventually caught up, so let’s just pretend this was a learning experience for you.
It certainly was

I learned that you don’t like being told you’re wrong even when you obviously are.
 
It certainly was

I learned that you don’t like being told you’re wrong even when you obviously are.
Oh absolutely, a real educational moment for you. You learned that disagreeing with me doesn’t magically make you right, no matter how confidently you announce it. But hey, self‑awareness has to start somewhere.
 
There wasn't a panel. You're correct the PL and Chelsea came to an agreement (settlement) without the use of a panel. I'm not sure influenced each other is the correct term but they would have had to have found common ground that was acceptable to both parties, that's exactly what an agreement is.
the reason I said this is wrong is because it’s wrong.
 
Fucking hell, they'll open the Straits of Hormuz before this shit show gets resolved.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top