Thanks. But if they first learned of a potential fraud in 2018 could they only look back as far as 2012 , or am I not understanding the time barring thing at all. Lol
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.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
manimanc
Well-Known Member
Paddy Power taking the piss again :)
Petition started by the scousers against paddy power i 3...2....1...
That is really funny by the way.
SatOnTheWall
Well-Known Member
Make of this what you will, but I've just been privy to some startling information that would blow the lid off PGMOL and the power brokers at the Premier League, if it became public. It involves a recording of a conversation between the match day referee and VAR official at a recent away match, a recording that is now in the hands of City.
It's my firm belief that City have compiled a dossier so incendiary, that the Premier League will have no choice but to totally exonerate the Club of any wrongdoing. If they don't, this is going nuclear. Either way, we hold all the cards and this explains why we're so bullish about the eventual outcome. The Premier League are on the back foot, and in my opinion, are currently lobbying the membership as to how best to quietly end the process. I have also been advised that at least one of the "Nasty 9" has had board level discussions with City, distancing themselves from the others in the cabal.
Pep's press conference tells us all we need to know. Watch it again, look at the anger and barely controllable rage in the mans eyes. His attitude wasn't based upon him being reassured about some poxy finances & bullshit charges, it was because he KNOWS exactly what is coming.
Sit back and enjoy the ride Blues.
I am not sure I like this.
I want us to be cleared through a proper process because we didn’t do it, not because we blackmailed our way to it.
I would treat them as two totally separate situations.
If we have got such a recording/dossier, I would like to think we will go straight to the proper authority with it.
Last edited:
Inter Me Nan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 10,541
Please be true & please let it be the derby.Make of this what you will, but I've just been privy to some startling information that would blow the lid off PGMOL and the power brokers at the Premier League, if it became public. It involves a recording of a conversation between the match day referee and VAR official at a recent away match, a recording that is now in the hands of City.
It's my firm belief that City have compiled a dossier so incendiary, that the Premier League will have no choice but to totally exonerate the Club of any wrongdoing. If they don't, this is going nuclear. Either way, we hold all the cards and this explains why we're so bullish about the eventual outcome. The Premier League are on the back foot, and in my opinion, are currently lobbying the membership as to how best to quietly end the process. I have also been advised that at least one of the "Nasty 9" has had board level discussions with City, distancing themselves from the others in the cabal.
Pep's press conference tells us all we need to know. Watch it again, look at the anger and barely controllable rage in the mans eyes. His attitude wasn't based upon him being reassured about some poxy finances & bullshit charges, it was because he KNOWS exactly what is coming.
Sit back and enjoy the ride Blues.
No. In essence it resets the time to file the claim. Otherwise, you could get away with things by dishonestly concealing them long enough. It is a high hurdle to prove dishonest concealment thoughThanks. But if they first learned of a potential fraud in 2018 could they only look back as far as 2012 , or am I not understanding the time barring thing at all. Lol
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
Exactly.They have already got the verdict they want and that is guilty as charges in the public eye and arena again.
All about reputational damage, a hope players walk, a hope Pep walks, a hope it puts signings off and a hope sponsors walk.
The more I think about this the more I think it’s a sham suite of charges with little to no merit whatsoever but they know it will never get to a stage where the charges are picked apart.
It’s the reputational damage that’s a free hit here.
Eric Hitchmough
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2015
- Messages
- 3,089
WowzersMake of this what you will, but I've just been privy to some startling information that would blow the lid off PGMOL and the power brokers at the Premier League, if it became public. It involves a recording of a conversation between the match day referee and VAR official at a recent away match, a recording that is now in the hands of City.
It's my firm belief that City have compiled a dossier so incendiary, that the Premier League will have no choice but to totally exonerate the Club of any wrongdoing. If they don't, this is going nuclear. Either way, we hold all the cards and this explains why we're so bullish about the eventual outcome. The Premier League are on the back foot, and in my opinion, are currently lobbying the membership as to how best to quietly end the process. I have also been advised that at least one of the "Nasty 9" has had board level discussions with City, distancing themselves from the others in the cabal.
Pep's press conference tells us all we need to know. Watch it again, look at the anger and barely controllable rage in the mans eyes. His attitude wasn't based upon him being reassured about some poxy finances & bullshit charges, it was because he KNOWS exactly what is coming.
Sit back and enjoy the ride Blues.
Thanks again mate.No. In essence it resets the time to file the claim. Otherwise, you could get away with things by dishonestly concealing them long enough. It is a high hurdle to prove dishonest concealment though
So it’s either the entire case or anything from 2017.
I know what your saying about the concealment being hard to prove.
But it’s the burden of proof in this hearing that worries me As it’s not a criminal court , we could be talking about the balance of probability only ?
Correct. But with an emphasis on cogency of evidence in the case of allegations of this seriousness.Thanks again mate.
So it’s either the entire case or anything from 2017.
I know what your saying about the concealment being hard to prove.
But it’s the burden of proof in this hearing that worries me As it’s not a criminal court , we could be talking about the balance of probability only ?
Love Paddy Power, put in earlier before this when someone mentioned they will take the piss out of us, that even if they do they do it out of everyone.The charges against us are very serious but that is funny. The crouch bit cracked me up. -:)
Crouch is a funny guy