Search results

I'd say it'd be impossible to even try this... for a start there's a 'butterfly effect' in play – if we're found guilty, then any money we've pumped into the PL or given any club could be deemed to have given those clubs an advantage... Take Arsenal for example, the amount of money they've had...

Same here - I sincerely hope that ever since that first UEFA accusation we have been 'acquiring' filth on all our detractors... fire with fire. When our name is cleared I'm envisaging a scene like the end of the Godfather - Mansour sat there whilst everyone gets their come uppance!

The ironic thing is - money was always about money... but even moreso after the creation of the Premier League - Which was THEIR doing! They, along with Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs are the reason the PL is all about money, what they hate is that our owners are better at business than they are!

Are we fuck!

It's the one thing that has pissed me off in all of this... Every report, either on TV, radio or in print asks "what will be the penalties if City are found guilty" ...not ONE media outlet has looked from the other side – What will be the outcome when City beat this bunch of vipers at the hearing?

The line I found interesting was "he felt that it is widely considered City enhanced our revenues" – Widely considered? Why is it? Reading between the lines there i'd say that the red cartel have been in the ear of other teams telling them what they want them to believe.

the amount of Liverpool fans that will take this as gospel, despite the source

Didn't Adidas or Nike question how New Balance's Liverpool kit deal was incredibly high and there was no way they could match it... and that FSG had links to somebody on NB's board?

People don't realise the political machinations behind football at the highest level... it's always been thus, and three teams particularly have always been very close bedfellows at boardroom level... the very three we now call the Red Cartel.

I disagree... when you say "it doesn't look good", i'd argue that a biased media is framing it to look that way, when in reality we are challenging the validity... the legality of a rule that was specifically brought in after Newcastle were bought. I don't want a situation where stupid...

Could it possibly be intended that way... could this be the PL's face-saving strategy the club agreed to? Bring this claim and get it thrown out... making the PL look good, because they've lost the case against us and the 115 charges?!?

Think it's a targetted attack at the Red Cartel's control of the Premier League more than anything.

It doesn't even make sense, when there are teams who have spent more than us... It'd make sense if they meant there were other cyclist taking far more drugs than Armstrong, but he won anyway!

It's subliminal manipulation by the media... sadly in the social media age there are many ways they can manipulate the general public - or targeted sections of it! The media in this country - driven by the Red cartel, is influencing the public perception of our case, hopefully the club is wise...

Can you listen again?

Not arsed about what the article says - other than, why is the former Chief Executive coming out with this, surely this should be confidential till the case is heard/resolved... Surely City have a strong case that all these leaks have influenced opinon and damaged our reputation?!

Exactly - it's like changing the speed limit on a road to 20mph, then fining people for driving above that limit 10yrs ago!

Fantastic posts... One thought though re non-compliance... If the PL's requests are deemed unreasonable, then can we really be charged with non-compliance? Surely if they've made unreasonable requests we have every right to say no! Then re Fordham... that was never hidden, it was registered on...

They've won it once and finished second twice... so what's this ALL... if we were taken out of the picture, they would have won two more!

Not a legal expert obviously, but surely that's contentious too? City have submitted all the financial documents/records they are required to by the PL... if the PL are now saying there's something wrong, then it's up to them to prove it, I just don't see how City are legally required to supply...