wolfie1988
Well-Known Member
"Chelsea Rent Boys"
It will no doubt be sung tomorrow and reported on far differently.
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.
Media thread 2022/23
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
It will no doubt be sung tomorrow and reported on far differently.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
If guess it would be the rent boys chant or a variation of it?What were the Rags singing about Frank Lampard that was reported as homophobic?
Brooklands Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2021
- Messages
- 384
- Team supported
- Manchester City
No mate I grew up in Brooklands and live in north Manchester now.You live in Trafford ?
Brooklands Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2021
- Messages
- 384
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I suppose you could bud. They don't know your name so if they ask for it close your door without replying.Can't you just say "your not coming in" ?
They cannot enter without a search warrant which they will not be granted without any evidence of wrong doing. Ask who they are, when they say TV licence (capita) say no thankyou and close the door, you do not have to speak to them, however they will keep sending the letters, put them in the bin.Can't you just say "your not coming in" ?
wolfie1988
Well-Known Member
Suspect Simon Stone wouldn’t have euphemistically dismissed it a “song referencing Chelsea” if it was at The Etihad.
In contrast, this is how Simon reported the flare being thrown down from the away fans at the Liverpool game(he didn't) and he had to get a dig in about noise too before the end of the game.
He genuinely shouldn't be allowed access of any kind to City on the grounds that his reporting his completely imbalanced.
I thought it was the Premier League who had the long-running investigation?Anyway, I see Martín Zeigler has rehashed his “why oh why haven’t the FA charged City” article with the usual incorrect facts about the UEFA/CAS investigation. Can’t link as it’s behind a firewall.
feedmpenzaandhewillscore
Well-Known Member
Anyway, I see Martín Zeigler has rehashed his “why oh why haven’t the FA charged City” article with the usual incorrect facts about the UEFA/CAS investigation. Can’t link as it’s behind a firewall.
I’ve read the shortened version, talks about der speigal but reference to the CAS throwing the case out. Not like that would put a slant on why nothing has happened eh?
You need one for commercial premises but I don't know anybody that does.No ...only if you watch it !!
tregyblue61
Well-Known Member
Martin Ziegler:
The Premier League’s investigation into alleged rule breaches by Manchester City has entered its fifth year with senior football figures believing the delay is an increasingly bad look for the English game.
A High Court judge said in July 2021 that it was “a legitimate public concern” that an investigation launched in December 2018 had made so little progress, but 18 months later it is still going on.
The Premier League launched its inquiry after documents obtained by a computer hacker were published by the German news website Der Spiegel, alleging that City’s Abu Dhabi owners made payments to the club instead of sponsors and also made secret payments to agents.
One senior figure in football has described the delays as “disgraceful”, especially at a time when an independent regulator is about to be brought into the English game. Although the regulator would not take over disciplinary functions from the leagues, clubs could land themselves in serious trouble if they provide inaccurate information to a statutory body.
City have always denied wrongdoing and their lawyers told the court in 2021 that “it may be that no charges will ever be brought”.
Last May, Der Spiegel published City’s contract with Roberto Mancini, their manager from 2009 to 2013, detailing how more than half of his basic salary was paid to his company via a consultancy contract with the Abu Dhabi-based club Al Jazira.
After the leaks, City overturned a Champions League ban imposed by Uefa, as many of the alleged offences were time-barred, but no such time restriction operates in the Premier League.
The July 2021 court ruling revealed that City had lost a challenge over an arbitration panel’s right to hear the case and had been obliged to hand over documents.
The Premier League’s investigation into alleged rule breaches by Manchester City has entered its fifth year with senior football figures believing the delay is an increasingly bad look for the English game.
A High Court judge said in July 2021 that it was “a legitimate public concern” that an investigation launched in December 2018 had made so little progress, but 18 months later it is still going on.
The Premier League launched its inquiry after documents obtained by a computer hacker were published by the German news website Der Spiegel, alleging that City’s Abu Dhabi owners made payments to the club instead of sponsors and also made secret payments to agents.
One senior figure in football has described the delays as “disgraceful”, especially at a time when an independent regulator is about to be brought into the English game. Although the regulator would not take over disciplinary functions from the leagues, clubs could land themselves in serious trouble if they provide inaccurate information to a statutory body.
City have always denied wrongdoing and their lawyers told the court in 2021 that “it may be that no charges will ever be brought”.
Last May, Der Spiegel published City’s contract with Roberto Mancini, their manager from 2009 to 2013, detailing how more than half of his basic salary was paid to his company via a consultancy contract with the Abu Dhabi-based club Al Jazira.
After the leaks, City overturned a Champions League ban imposed by Uefa, as many of the alleged offences were time-barred, but no such time restriction operates in the Premier League.
The July 2021 court ruling revealed that City had lost a challenge over an arbitration panel’s right to hear the case and had been obliged to hand over documents.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.