115 Charges - FAQs

eastmanc said:
LB on City xtra. He has just read the full report and he spoke about exactly that on his last podcast. He read all 90 odd pages of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have more than a few times, they definitely didn’t say that. It’s not something they would, it wasn’t a defence we put forward for them to comment about.

All they said in the conclusion was what I said, they agreed there was a legitimate basis to prosecute and we also acknowledged it.
 
meltonblue said:
I wouldn’t call it spurious as such, Uefa, ourselves and CAS all agreed that the content of the emails if deemed admissible would mean we had a legitimate case to answer.
Click to expand...

But the premier league knew the emails were doctored to present an out of context view & didn’t need to proceed.

The question is after reading the CAS findings why did they feel the need to proceed?

Edit: Mods can this reply & all others similar be moved to the other thread…
 
meltonblue said:
Yeah I have more than a few times, they definitely didn’t say that. It’s not something they would, it wasn’t a defence we put forward for them to comment about.

All they said in the conclusion was what I said, they agreed there was a legitimate basis to prosecute and we also acknowledged it.
Click to expand...
No they didn't LB said that on page 78 the panel agreed that the allegations were ridiculous and dangerous and Martin, the guest, said that the panel basically agreed that there was a little bit of a witchhunt. Have a look at the podcast.



 
cheekybids said:
But the premier league knew the emails were doctored to present an out of context view & didn’t need to proceed.

The question is after reading the CAS findings why did they feel the need to proceed?

Edit: Mods can this reply & all others similar be moved to the other thread…
Click to expand...

I’m assuming because of the emails that were leaked after the CAS judgment, otherwise I agree. That or they’ve got some other evidence we don’t know about.

Agree about moving all these comments.
 
Last edited:
kismet said:
Excellent piece.

I think the Premier League have been put under enormous pressure by the Red Cartel and Spurs as they can't match our business model. I think the PL have rushed this and succumbed to the pressure from the clubs. They've gone for repetition and sheer volume of charges to try and exaggerate the effect. Hence I don't think their case is water tight. It is flimsy.

I also cannot see that the PL will go through with the flimsy charges that accuse the senior member of one of our biggest and best trading partners at £25 Billion per annum. Add into that the fact that they are one of our best friends in the Middle East would be strategically ridiculous. Finally, that this has been brought about by jealous rivals would be a massive gamble to take on the part of the PL.
Click to expand...
can we keep comments like this to the other thread, this one pops up almost every second page and keep this thread to more fact based comments otherwise it will be 1000 posts in no time. people starting with .. im no lawyer, i assume, red cartel... keep to other one
 
eastmanc said:
No they didn't LB said that on page 78 the panel agreed that the allegations were ridiculous and dangerous and Martin, the guest, said that the panel basically agreed that there was a little bit of a witchhunt. Have a look at the podcast.



Click to expand...


I listened to both of those for a bit, I don’t know what line they could be referring to and there’s nothing on that page about it - that page is about the request of information from Uefa to us.

That wouldn’t be the conclusion anyway though, that doesn’t come til later in the doc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bez
Bez said:
Excellent summary. A question I have is regarding the integrity of the independent tribunal - what rules ensure that there cannot be a kangaroo court? Are the members of the tribunal personally liable for any wrongdoing if proven? What is their personal risk if they don't conduct the process fairly or in a balanced and objective manner?
Click to expand...
I've updated the OP to cover the constitution of the tribunal

The answer to your other points is (a) it would be almost impossible to show that a tribunal had reached a decision that they knew was wrong but decided to reach because they don't like City, but (b) if the worst came to the worst, they are insured.
 
terraloon said:
The first “ one” wouldn’t fall under the jurisdiction of either the PL or come that the FA it would be something that FIFA would have to take forward
Click to expand...
Exactly mate, which shows that the Der Spiegel article lumping it in with the other PL allegations against City is a load of bollocks!

On another note, what are your thoughts regarding the allegations against Chelsea? According to some of the legal experts on here, they’re every bit as serious as the ones against City. Plus I read that more allegations have surfaced in the meantime over rumoured third party payments. If the City case is anything to go by, it could be years before that one is resolved as well.

Edit: Apologies mods - that last paragraph probably doesn’t belong in this thread. Feel free to move it - the Chelsea thread is probably the correct place
 
Last edited:
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.