PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[FantasyIreland]

How? My dissemination point relates to the media. You think Dan Roan would provide a counterpoint if City briefed the press about the duplication of the charges? He’s not interested in presenting a balanced picture. 115 sounds better than 5. Plus, it’s factually correct, if misleading.

It’s the same reason why this preposterous loophole argument has taken root.

That I agree with,but why don't our club put out their own statement which provides more detail and clarity? Downplay the issue,if you like?

 

[pavelsrnicek]

The fact the Times article last week obviously based on a briefing from City got covered absolutely everywhere and was talked about on every major tv, radio and social media channel suggests otherwise.

I doubt that article was based on a City briefing, we’d just beaten Real and were on the verge of winning the league, why would we bring up the charges? The fact that Murray Rosen’s impartiality was the main takeaway would suggest it came from elsewhere.

 

[moomba]

That I agree with,but why don't our club put out their own statement which provides more detail and clarity? Downplay the issue,if you like?

Because then you have to put out statements on every legal issue or you seem like your hiding something. All through this we've put out a statement and said we wouldn't comment further.

That wouldn't hold much weight now, or in the future if we change our mind and comment through the process.

 

[FantasyIreland]

Because then you have to put out statements on every legal issue or you seem like your hiding something. All through this we've put out a statement and said we wouldn't comment further.

That wouldn't hold much weight now, or in the future if we change our mind and comment through the process.

Fair enough,cheers

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

How have you worked that out?

You said the club’s messaging on this had been incredibly poor. In your next post on the subject you cited an example of the club’s messaging being widely and positively disseminated.

It’s a good job for you that you don’t have to argue for a living.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

The fact the Times article last week obviously based on a briefing from City got covered absolutely everywhere and was talked about on every major tv, radio and social media channel suggests otherwise.

No way was that a City briefing.
What makes you think it was?

 

[AndyP68]

I'm pretty sure the club will have thought through every step they are taking. Although coming out with all guns blazing might be what the fans want, there is a lot to be said for keeping your powder dry. Any attempt to explain publicly the basis of our innocence could easily prejudice the case. Moreover, any public defence is unlikely to be accepted as legitimate by the media, so why bother.

As a City fan my shoulders have been broadened over the years. Let them say what they want.

 

[Gordyola]

It'll be years. There has only been a white paper published, so there will be discussion of that, then it has to be drawn up as a bill to get it through Parliament, and then a wait until whenever it says the regulator will be in place. Chuck in the election in 18 months, and it may not happen for a long time.

The plan is for the start of next season as its supported by all parties there will be a "shadow regulator" until a permanent appointment is made

English football’s watershed independent regulator to launch next year

The new commission will oversee the sport in England and is set for the beginning of the 2024-25 season

www.independent.co.uk

 

[halfcenturyup]

I doubt that article was based on a City briefing, we’d just beaten Real and were on the verge of winning the league, why would we bring up the charges? The fact that Murray Rosen’s impartiality was the main takeaway would suggest it came from elsewhere.

Agreed. There is no way the club would brief that we are disputing a KC's integrity because of the team he supports. The club may well be raising independence issues, and the KC's Arsenal connections or his previous, and his continuing, connections to the PL may be one, but it would be monumentally stupid to allow a briefing about an appeal turn into a tribal issue that only an incredibly stupid press/public could concoct.

That leak was done to damage the club again IMO at a moment of importance, not help us. Maybe not the PL, but someone involved in the PL process. Now I wonder who that may have been?

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

I'm pretty sure the club will have thought through every step they are taking. Although coming out with all guns blazing might be what the fans want, there is a lot to be said for keeping your powder dry. Any attempt to explain publicly the basis of our innocence could easily prejudice the case. Moreover, any public defence is unlikely to be accepted as legitimate by the media, so why bother.

As a City fan my shoulders have been broadened over the years. Let them say what they want.

Same as what I think. anything said by our owners will fall of deaf ears and turned into something more inflammatory probably. I think they've learnt just say nothing and let facts speak. Not sure its the best way and I do wish they would come out and show some opposition to this bullshit, but I think we've all experienced it, you say anything in our defence you will get laughed at. Pointless.