Zabbasbeard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Messages
- 2,692
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Thing is Tolmie in good faith related what a source from another club said. No guarantees just potentially hopeful noises for us.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
Because Tolmies source was saying the IC had concerns over the charges levied when City had give the evidence required?
How would a club official from another club know that? They wouldn’t unless the IC isn’t independent/impartial which were told by the legal beagles on here that in nigh impossible and fanciful
Unless it’s United’s new ceo?
wolviedinho
Well-Known Member
A Rag mate… best ignoring -:)Who’s Tolmie? lol
wolviedinho
Well-Known Member
You can’t possibly make that last claim unless you are sitting on the tribunal. This case has been leaking like a sieve from the beginning. Why stop now? Because it’s immoral? HahaWhat I’m saying is Tolmie has passed on info he’s heard in good faith but it basically just someone’s opinion from another club and should be taken as such
There is no way the IC has said to anyone at this stage what the source stating they have
If we believe the rags/dips/arse+spurs have influence over masters do you not think they would have influence or at the very least the ear of the tribunal?
The rhetoric is changing because the evidence to support city’s position is irrefutable.
Last edited:
The IC is not independent nor impartial regardless of what any F. Lee Bailey tries to tell us...Because Tolmies source was saying the IC had concerns over the charges levied when City had give the evidence required?
How would a club official from another club know that? They wouldn’t unless the IC isn’t independent/impartial which were told by the legal beagles on here that in nigh impossible and fanciful
Chi-town blues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 May 2012
- Messages
- 31,315
muffin .What did it say?
mrtwiceaseason
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 7,575
There was other people the night before had the same information.we were given the heads upHe had been let go/banned by City at the time and was trying to stay relevant, he took a massive gamble calling the verdict and he burnt whatever bridges he had left at the club in doing so.
Not even City knew the verdict when he was tweeting the words “exonerated”.
He took a punt and was 99% correct
We weren’t. It has been confirmed on here by people in the know that City didn’t know till just before the announcement.There was other people the night before had the same information.we were given the heads up
People jumped on Ian’s tweet, it was nothing more than a punt.
mrtwiceaseason
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 7,575
Not sure when Ian's tweet went out just checked we knew at 9 25 on July 9thWe weren’t. It has been confirmed on here by people in the know that City didn’t know till just before the announcement.
People jumped on Ian’s tweet, it was nothing more than a punt.