PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[bluenova]

Missed it but he is quoted as sports headline in Daily Fail saying he predicts relegation is the minimum we'll be punished with.

To be fair to the Mail, they put his comment saying City would get off in the 9th paragraph - that's early for them.

The classic Mail article is one biased side for at least 12 paragraphs, usually repeating the point so readers get bored. Then, when they know most people have stopped reading, they put in the "actually all the above was bollocks" paragraph. They get to say they wrote a balanced article, whilst knowing most people get the one sided rubbish.

 

[Deepest Blue]

He's as good at presenting a radio show as he is at running a football club! how the fuck is that twunt still employed is beyond a mystery.

He shouts people down with an assertive voice that protects the illusion that he's the smartest guy in the room.
A media savvy guy like Eddie Hearn played a losing hand and still wiped the floor with him. Stefan is polite and therefore only managed a draw.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Thanks all for the comments. I feel it is not credible (especially as I have said it before), to dance around what happens if everything is proven. It is the key part of why I don't believe they will ultimately prove the allegations. And nobody can be in doubt as to the seriousness now post Everton if we are found to have breached these rules on a wholesale basis for a decade. I know it is not a good soundbite and yes this is a little naive but it is difficult to tread that line.

Absolutely agree on this the ramifications if they land this will be disastrous for the club, flip side you seem to be the lone voice out there expressing the other side that the charges are so big and over a large period of time that the Premier League will have a heck of time landing them.

No one outside of the club were interested in the alternative argument during the Uefa situation and were scratching their heads when it was thrown out. That’s why I believe this time will be exactly the same, why is there no one out there from a legal stand point arguing the PLs position in a grown up, knowledgeable and qualified opinion? I think we know the reason why.

 

[halfcenturyup]

It's tough enough to listen to him on the radio, but I had the displeasure of watching on youtube instead and it took everything I had not to punch the screen.

I've listened back just to see if I missed anything initially, and this time didn't watch so my ears were fully engaged! Right at the end, when Stefan is explaining the fact that these accusations would involve a high number of senior executives/board members/official all being part of the conspiracy, Jordan pipes up with "like Enron".

For those that don't know, that is a reference to a major accounting scandal involving widespread fraud. So it was a loaded remark from Jordan.

Not sure how he thinks this case is similar to Enron. I suppose it makes him sound informed though.

One thing I have never heard is a sensible premise for the case against City. They are seriously thinking that two large companies, both in regulated markets, and supported by one of the richest governments on the planet needed to take, what to them is, peanuts from a private individual to meet sponsorships entered into at fair value? It just doesn't make any sense. Even less sense when they say Mansour has influence over the two companies because of his position. If he had that much influence he could just tell them to pay it themselves. It's a weird argument to make even before you consider the lack of evidence.

 

[The blue phantom]

Talksport have now twisted his words on the news bullitin. "Stefan has said it will only end in one way. Relegation down to league 2"

Well they were never going to post "Financial expert thinks it's impossible for the PL to prove so many people and company's were in on the fraud" That headline would of pissed off the rabid Rags and Scousers.

 

[Blue and true]

So, can I start getting giddy? I'm way behind, been away for a few days with work, can someone tell me what's happened?

 

[pudge]

Why?

A, that is not what he said. He said, IF it turns out that all these people have colluded to decieve..

That's exactly the reason why I wish it wasn't said in the manner it was because there was no "if"

I've already heard their top of the hour update news bollocks replaying the same soundbite for the desired effect.

That's all.

 

[Coatigan]

The takeaway of that is much simpler and more meaningful than some make it out to be. It is basically scale.

It is not merely a case of 'it is so difficult to prove alleged offenses of that scale' and therefore we could be cleared. It is 'it is highly unlikely that deception of that scale happened, involving so many parties and people.

The secondary takeaway is also one of scale. Of simon jordan's twattery.

 

[The blue phantom]

He had a subjective word :)

Strange thing is I listened back a couple of times and I'm convinced he originally said Objectively/Objective.

 

[MCFC1993]

Just wish he hadn't given the soundbite of "There's no way this doesn't end without relegation."

I don't mind it, he has to stay objective in the media for his information and opinions to be validated.

A lot football fans now know that we could be relegated but getting that proof to do so will be extremely difficult.