Anyone else finding that you can't get more than four or five sentences into a conversation about City's charges before the other party exposes that they don't have a clue what they're on about?
That post earlier about us being in a 'post-truth society' really hits home. They've seen some bloke on Twitter say that 'City only got off on a technicality last time' and they all believe it.
chatted to an oldham mate yesterday he asked about allegations and how i feelI can't say I've ever discussed it with anyone, and nobody has ever brought it up with me either.
I'm not worried about it at all, and I've no idea how this thread got to over 3000 pages.
Tbh, I think they may well be just switching off their normal cognitive functions for a leisure activity - but it does show how easy it is for the masses to be led by the nose.Directors being led by social meeja FFS no wonder our country is fked!! You at least expect some critical, objective analysis from people who's decisions affect workers mortgages etc! Thats a fenuine worry.
I was ashamed of myself the other night, played soccer in City top and few of us went for a pint after and the end of the Arsenal game was on. There’s 3 old geezers, all arse fans, watching it. They must have had a few but kept staring at me with city top on, eventually the eldest who must have been in his 80’s comes over, leans in to our conversation and starts verbally assaulting us, lol, with all the usual cliches as you’ve said above. I had him in knots as he didn’t have a clue, couldn’t answer what charges were, couldn’t get his head around our fine last time being for non-cooperation and not cheating etc, but the silly old **** just wouldn’t let it go and is practically spitting on me he’s raging so much by this point. I then had to lower myself to telling him to get the fuck out of the pub and called him a wanker, hahaha.Anyone else finding that you can't get more than four or five sentences into a conversation about City's charges before the other party exposes that they don't have a clue what they're on about?
That post earlier about us being in a 'post-truth society' really hits home. They've seen some bloke on Twitter say that 'City only got off on a technicality last time' and they all believe it.
Well it sounds like he is a wanker and to think that some poor fuckers somewhere have probably had to listen to this guy when he's pissed for over half a century.I was ashamed of myself the other night, played soccer in City top and few of us went for a pint after and the end of the Arsenal game was on. There’s 3 old geezers, all arse fans, watching it. They must have had a few but kept staring at me with city top on, eventually the eldest who must have been in his 80’s comes over, leans in to our conversation and starts verbally assaulting us, lol, with all the usual cliches as you’ve said above. I had him in knots as he didn’t have a clue, couldn’t answer what charges were, couldn’t get his head around our fine last time being for non-cooperation and not cheating etc, but the silly old **** just wouldn’t let it go and is practically spitting on me he’s raging so much by this point. I then had to lower myself to telling him to get the fuck out of the pub and called him a wanker, hahaha.
Although it may not look like it, we are not going before the court of public opinion, in fact to the club as a corporate body it matters little, why should it, most of them are rival fans and whatever the evidence or outcome they will come to the conclusion that is biased to their own beliefs, so it quite pointless releasing the evidence, plus I have never known a case criminal or civil or even tribunal whereas the defence has released the evidence to the public prior to any hearing.That’s fine, it’s all a game of opinions at the end of the day.
Ultimately though, the club say they have ‘irrefutable evidence’ that the charges are bollocks. To see this evidence is to kill the case stone dead, there is that little ambiguity.
That then only leaves two scenarios.
1. The club have this evidence, have decided under legal advice to not engage with the investigation (very likely to avoid falling foul of a fishing expedition) and accept non-compliance charges that will result in a hefty fine
2. The club have provided all of this evidence, the PL and some of the UKs top legal minds, people who pick and choose their cases, have seen this evidence and still plowed ahead in a case of such corporate negligence it makes Gerald Rayner look a visionary, and thrown in non-compliance charges for a laugh also.
My point was a simple one - a poster said if City are found not guilty of all charges they should ‘sue everyone’, but unless it’s a case of scenario 2 above, it’s simply not possible, and if it’s scenario 2 at the end of the day, the PL executives and KC’s who saw ‘irrefutable evidence’ and pushed on would have being sued way down their list of concerns.
Also fine, but whilst it would be absolutely hilarious if all the PL have is the UEFA case that they want to retry, it stretches extremely thin the concept of plausibility that some of the UKs top KCs would be willing to put their reputations and their chambers’ reputations on the line to try that case again, especially with the weightiest allegations having already been found unsubstantiated by CAS. These guys earn millions of pounds a year and pick and choose their cases, they’re not taking this case for money or because they’re secretly Arsenal/Liverpool/United fans.
In that scenario, any KC worth their salt would be advising the club to ‘take a pinch’ if it were offered as some of the Walter Mittys would have you believe the PL have been desperate for. It’s not just SM who can make decisions anymore either, there are important shareholders with a lot of money on the line, it would be negligence of the highest order to refuse a settlement if offered no matter how confident you are.
If in 18 months time the ruling comes out and it turns out the PL had nothing more than the UEFA case, ran with it anywhere and got torn apart at the tribunal, I’ll be on here celebrating with you, trying to avoid a double hernia from laughing so hard, but for the reasons above, I just don’t see any plausible scenario that the PL and KCs would be that reckless, even with the pressure other clubs and an incoming independent regulator no doubt put them under.
We could have actively prevented it ? You win bollocks of the year awardSue who for what?
Even in the absolute best case scenario that this is all a wild goose chase, trying to rehash the UEFA case, the fact still remains that City could’ve put this to bed at any time in the past 5 years, rather than clam up on legal advice and refuse to respond to the PL’s fishing trips.
No court in the world is going to rule jn your favour for something you could’ve actively prevented.
I was ashamed of myself the other night, played soccer in City top and few of us went for a pint after and the end of the Arsenal game was on. There’s 3 old geezers, all arse fans, watching it. They must have had a few but kept staring at me with city top on, eventually the eldest who must have been in his 80’s comes over, leans in to our conversation and starts verbally assaulting us, lol, with all the usual cliches as you’ve said above. I had him in knots as he didn’t have a clue, couldn’t answer what charges were, couldn’t get his head around our fine last time being for non-cooperation and not cheating etc, but the silly old **** just wouldn’t let it go and is practically spitting on me he’s raging so much by this point. I then had to lower myself to telling him to get the fuck out of the pub and called him a wanker, hahaha.
Careful with that statement Kaz. There's still a month to go yet.We could have actively prevented it ? You win bollocks of the year award