Just dropped my own little bomb in there in answer to this whopper:
What October case is this? Are you referring to the APT case? If you are, I think you will find that it was the Premier League who wanted to delay the announcement of the outcome and City were more than happy to put it out there.
And what's all this about "they said they'd win all the charges but they didn't"? You do realise that there were no charges against City in the APT case because it was City who brought the case against the PL don't you? Not only that, City didn't have to win on every single point to prove that the rules were unlawful. They only had to win on a single one. And speaking of unlawful, it says a hell of a lot about you when your last paragraph basically says you're in favour of clubs voting for amended rules on Friday that could still turn out to be unlawful just because it's a vote against City. It'll be interesting to see which way United vote, considering you don't have a single penny of interest-free shareholder loans on your books and your new saviour Ratcliffe can't get enough of blowing smoke up City's arse in terms of how well we're run as a club.
Your post couldn't be more full of ignorance and bullshit if you tried. It's only topped by the sheer amount of unfounded horseshit spouted on the 115/129/130 charges thread. It often makes me wonder if anyone's doing any moderating when it comes to that particular topic.