SebastianBlue
President, International Julian Alvarez Fan Club
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 56,619
Nobody expects the City Accusation!We were the accuser here, we had nothing to be cleared of!
Nobody expects the City Accusation!We were the accuser here, we had nothing to be cleared of!
I'm assuming from the BBC report claiming a victory for the PL and city only winning on a couple of minor points it will be the PL claiming compensation from city ;-)If the prem are claiming victory, yet having to call an emergency meeting and being open to a huge compensation claim, I wonder what their definition of defeat could possibly be.
Having had time to reflect I think this version is better, as the Jaap Stam reference is sillyOhh Lord David Pannick, he is the fucking man
He is an academic, he's smarter than Jaap Stam
He works in the law courts for Guardiola's men
And when we win the 115 we'll sing this song again
Beautiful isn’t it.We were the accuser here, we had nothing to be cleared of!
Destroying the red cartel.Looks like we are keeping all our trophies after all. So what's the next load of shit we will be accused of having done ?
They must also be delighted about being sued by Newcastle United now that their corrupt plot to prevent Newcastle investing money has been exposed. Imagine the fun of being sued by one of the richest organisations in the world who have bottomless legal resources. What a victory for the PL.According to my source they love the prospect of paying damages! Absolutely love it, they do. And also having to amend their rules in a way that might lead to half the league failing PSR. Couldn't have worked out better, they tell me. "Forget all the other stuff" they say, "The court told us we needed rules, they just didn't agree with the ones we wrote. But the important thing is we have established we need rules, and we actually didn't know that before so that's good."
They're all sat in PL HQ right now, slapping each other on the back. You know it's gone well when you might be on the hook for millions in compensation. Masters is grinning from ear to ear! I even heard he's begging them to take it out of his annual bonus.
"Pop the champagne lads, this is a significant victory for us" he's saying, as tears roll down his face.
Organised and clear as someone once said.Yep. Many of us completely vindicated after years of smirks and innuendo
Had a few interactions with this senile old **** on Twitter. Guy is a delusional twat.Ian Darke, once a **** always a ****. Get back to whittering about the cost of our bench you deluded red loving thick prick
Spot on. Many fans of other clubs will be glad City have had success in this case. Sure, we might not be everyone’s second favourite club these days but any United fan thinking we’re more hated than them cunts is deluded beyond belief. Even more so that they think WE’RE to blame for daring to challenge the legality of a something which has proven to be unlawful.These divs could not even organise a boycott of one of their games.
They exist within an echo chamber. They don't realise that most football fans in this country dislike their club and do not have a strong opinion on City's dealings with PSR, FFP and APT.
Exactly. The PL have been humiliatingly exposed as acting in bad faith at best.Just reading through the finding now in a bit more detail (I mean, what happens on the pitch is nothing compared to the excitement of these courtroom battles, eh?) and, I have to say, I can't read this any other way than we absolutely wiped the floor with them. They have to literally go back and increase value they placed on two city sponsorship deals.
There is no other way to read it. We won every major point it seems.
They've not followed their own rules. Those rules were discriminatory and were specifically applied in an unfair and discriminating way to Manchester City. They've reached competition law.
Ignore the bbc trying to get a punch in with things like city didn't win all their arguments, they're already on the canvas and the court has been completed, they just don't know it yet.
Whilst we should absolutely treat the '115' case separately, this can't hurt either. How inept have they been to suggest something so obviously in violation of the law? And this was supposed to be a refinement of the previous rules which they want to do us under. Plus, revaluing those two sponsorship deals.... They may not be relevant at all to the other case but again, if these are shown to have been regarded incorrectly by the self appointed authority, even discriminatory, then I bet the others reek of it also.