I doubt many of us would look into the detail of the charges the way we have (tried to) with City. Whether we'd assume guilt over innocence before the case was heard, is another matter entirely :-)Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.
Its just that we know we are right ;-)
I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.
I read @ScottSinclair 's post as meaning the PL charges rather than the CAS decision?Nah, not a chance it was only 10 minutes mate. There were rumours doing the rounds in the days leading up to the announcement that it had gone our way. I seem to recall that Pep was rather smug in one particular post-match interview. Ian Cheeseman tweeted a few days before that he'd heard it was positive news. And someone who runs one of the biggest supporters club branches was gobbing off that we'd won the case to all and sundry down the pub a couple of nights before it was announced.
What bothers me about LFC fans is that they, more than anyone because of Hillsborough, should know how much the media distorts and twists narratives. They are City's most vicious critics and yet these days they seem to believe everything that is written about our owner in the media, including the much-despised Sun newspaper. I am dubious about the way the media covers any story and I like to think I would not rush to judgement against another club..even our most bitter rivals.I doubt many of us would look into the detail of the charges the way we have (tried to) with City. Whether we'd assume guilt over innocence before the case was heard, is another matter entirely :-)
That's what I thought a rare if accidental complement from this person.Goodness me we got terrific value for money then…..
I tend to doubt most things anyone (including me) says on t'internet.What bothers me about LFC fans is that they, more than anyone because of Hillsborough, should know how much the media distorts and twists narratives. They are City's most vicious critics and yet these days they seem to believe everything that is written about our owner in the media, including the much-despised Sun newspaper. I am dubious about the way the media covers any story and I like to think I would not rush to judgement against another club..even our most bitter rivals.
Can't seen the problem with this if Etislat reimbursed the payments. If the money went from Etislat to Adug first and then on to City I also can't see a problem as long as City were upfront about it. Do Etislat sponsor any other CFG clubs like Etihad do? If that was the case why wouldn't money go to ADUG to be apportioned later. But City admitted all this and no action was taken. Also remember the Etislat payments in 2012,2013 happened during a period when we made huge losses, failed FFP rules, and settled with UEFA for £20m. What difference did it make and are the PL trying to punish us twice for the same period? None of this is illegal and it seems the PL are just trying to twist their own rules to suit the narrative.
I'm pretty sure the ship is heading in the right directionWith regards to the "Der Spiegel" emails in relation to both Etihad and Etisalat sponsorship monies. (These 2 issues must be the backbone of the PL charges of "true financial statements" and alleged "fraud" (the only way these issues can't be time barred as the charges suggest.))
If City provide the information, documents, statements or testimony in person, under oath, to underpin their version of actual events, as given at CAS, what evidence are the PL going to offer to the contrary that will be equally as compelling or cogent?
Isn't this where UEFAs case fell apart in that all they offered was "in our opinion....." and that the emails suggested a course of action which, without context, was in breach of the rules?
How can they expect to persuade the panel of arbiters with opinion as an argument against facts?
Nobody, certainly journalist asked the question as to what on earth the UEFA investigatory board were doing in coming to a decision to find City guilty which was plainly unsupported by fact and based solely on supposition and opinion.
So now here we are facing the same charges in effect, double jeopardy, but have the PL come up with a different strategy having seen UEFA fail?
Can 2 separate serious arbitration bodies (CAS and the PL panel) really come to polar opposite different opinions based on the same evidence and an equal burden of proof. As SB points out the PL charges have more serious consequences for the breaches alleged, which means the a greater cogency should be required of any PL evidence.
Do they have such evidence?
Most blues with any knowledge of the history of this case think not. The great unwashed on Twitter, our detractors and beyond don't care. We will have to wait and see.
These allegations have tainted the club beyond repair in the eyes of many. Unretrievably so, despite any findings of the arbitration panel in our favour.
Will the club seek to right this ship? Its uncertain what if anything can be done to put this right. I do however trust the club to take whatever action necessary it deems fit, even if as a fan I'm left somewhat perplexed by seeming inaction. After all, despite all the negatives, they've not done too badly up to now!
I'm pretty sure the ship is heading in the right direction
If I am a City fan and this was lfc I wouldnt care what the truth is. lfc are guilty and the media are hiding it.Let’s face it, it’s no coincidence that 99% of everyone that thinks we are innocent is a City fan.
Its just that we know we are right ;-)
I often wonder what I would think if it was another club. I would like to think I’d be objective but I’m not convinced as footy is so tribal.