PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

terraloon said:
If and of a course a big if the leaked documents are genuine it would seem

1) The heads of agreements for both contracts were signed on the same day19/12/2009 ( contracts were indeed signed on different dates )
2) There was considerable involvement in both contracts from very senior employees at City.
3) The invoices from Mancinis company were sent to Man City direct and payment of those invoices we’re actually routed via a Man City Bank account
Click to expand...
I suggest You review the CAS judgment for an understanding of how unreliable the DS leaked emails are…
 
Iassel said:
Absolutely 0% chance in my personal opinion as not even Lionel Hutz would allow his clients to turn down such a settlement.

Ultimately no matter how strong you believe your hand is, a trial (or tribunal) is a gamble that can go either way, if the prosecution is offering a sweet plea deal (such as an immaterial fine) you move heaven and earth to convince your client to take it.

City don’t employ stupid lawyers, so the fact the tribunal is moving forward is a very strong indication that no deals have been offered.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree with all of that. If it is a duplicate of a scenario you have already succeeded upon before an independent panel, further your clients are not simple laymen but extremely sophisticated business people, experienced in both international and local business and politics… no matter what the lawyer states they may decide to go their own way. I also feel that the messages from the club allow us to read into the top echelon’s mindset. They want this finished… for good. An acceptance of any kind of deal removes that possibility.
 
Last edited:
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I'm constantly amazed at the number of people who don't believe that the media indulges in systematic bias against certain clubs, when they absolutely do. I'm similarly amazed by those people who will acknowledge the possibility of political bias on the front pages of particular newspapers, but deny the same possibility when it comes to the back pages.
Just taking the Mail as an example, every article comes with a comments section. The paper's aim is to ensure that as many people as possible click on those articles, in order that they might maximise the advertising revenue central to their continued existence. It does this on the front pages by appealing to its largest readership demographic. Endless negative stories about lefties, teachers, lazy public servants, Meghan Markle, soft judges, asylum seekers, the cancel culture, 'militant' unions, remoaners, Gary Lineker etc etc are always the order of the day, because the Mail knows its foam flecked gammon army will hammer away with such fury that their keyboards will catch fire.
As to the back pages then, which two clubs have far and away the biggest fan bases in this country? And which club do you think is an oven ready enemy for both, having deprived them of hundreds of millions in prize money and trophies since 2011? Once you've joined the dots by answering those two questions, the penny should drop. City have been portrayed as football ruining, cheating, nouveau riche, sportswashing, plastic, no European pedigree, obscene spending (complete with squad cost comparisons, once famously when we weren't even one of the teams playing), human rights abusing, dodgy Arab owned, corrupt, 'dirty' oil money funded, success buying filth, non-stop for 15 years now, and our 'guilt' as regards the current PL investigation has long since been declared as fact.
Other papers, most notably the Guardian, have clear editorial policies when it comes to City and I defy you to find a single article from Miguel Delaney, Barney Ronay, Jonathan Liew etc that doesn't contain at least one of the phrases "state owned project", "oil funded" or "sportswashing". I've seen other journalists call our fans 'grubby apologists' and 'filthy rats', I've seen domestic broadcasters stuff their panels with rag pundits for our European games and listened to them call us mercenaries and wait until the half time interval to pan the camera around the crowd and sneer at us for having empty seats, and I've turned on the radio and heard us called "disgusting" and a "Frankenstein club". It's been relentless and no other club has ever had to put up with an onslaught of even remotely comparable degree. It doesn't mean that all journalists and broadcasters are out to get us, but compared to our immediate rivals we're a country mile ahead in the vilification stakes
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on, so why our club don't ban or sue some of the people who write this b0!!ocks about us I just don't understand.

CTID
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
I'm constantly amazed at the number of people who don't believe that the media indulges in systematic bias against certain clubs, when they absolutely do. I'm similarly amazed by those people who will acknowledge the possibility of political bias on the front pages of particular newspapers, but deny the same possibility when it comes to the back pages.
Just taking the Mail as an example, every article comes with a comments section. The paper's aim is to ensure that as many people as possible click on those articles, in order that they might maximise the advertising revenue central to their continued existence. It does this on the front pages by appealing to its largest readership demographic. Endless negative stories about lefties, teachers, lazy public servants, Meghan Markle, soft judges, asylum seekers, the cancel culture, 'militant' unions, remoaners, Gary Lineker etc etc are always the order of the day, because the Mail knows its foam flecked gammon army will hammer away with such fury that their keyboards will catch fire.
As to the back pages then, which two clubs have far and away the biggest fan bases in this country? And which club do you think is an oven ready enemy for both, having deprived them of hundreds of millions in prize money and trophies since 2011? Once you've joined the dots by answering those two questions, the penny should drop. City have been portrayed as football ruining, cheating, nouveau riche, sportswashing, plastic, no European pedigree, obscene spending (complete with squad cost comparisons, once famously when we weren't even one of the teams playing), human rights abusing, dodgy Arab owned, corrupt, 'dirty' oil money funded, success buying filth, non-stop for 15 years now, and our 'guilt' as regards the current PL investigation has long since been declared as fact.
Other papers, most notably the Guardian, have clear editorial policies when it comes to City and I defy you to find a single article from Miguel Delaney, Barney Ronay, Jonathan Liew etc that doesn't contain at least one of the phrases "state owned project", "oil funded" or "sportswashing". I've seen other journalists call our fans 'grubby apologists' and 'filthy rats', I've seen domestic broadcasters stuff their panels with rag pundits for our European games and listened to them call us mercenaries and wait until the half time interval to pan the camera around the crowd and sneer at us for having empty seats, and I've turned on the radio and heard us called "disgusting" and a "Frankenstein club". It's been relentless and no other club has ever had to put up with an onslaught of even remotely comparable degree. It doesn't mean that all journalists and broadcasters are out to get us, but compared to our immediate rivals we're a country mile ahead in the vilification stakes
Click to expand...
Fantastic post sir.
If only my rage at the constant shit we endure would subside and allow me to write such a level headed post.
 
Teraloon coming on here discussing the pl case against us and wanting to clarify certain situations, is making me want to go on the shed end and clarify certain situations regarding the illegal movement of children from Ukraine to Russia.
These Chelsea twats have the flimsiest glass house in history. Can we not attract any better quality of troll than Chelsea dickheads?
 
Stoned Rose said:
He should’ve been fucked off ages ago.
Click to expand...

It's all gone quiet, all gone quiet, all gone quiet over here ......

Didn't mind him really, he wasn't offensive at all. But he was like a dog with a bone, whoever he was, and was beginning to annoy @Chris in London. Once that happens, you are in trouble as I know only too well. Although I am proud to say I never got a "Holy Fuck" one line reply. :)
 
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.