PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Jacko1956]

You never know, he might ask him to go for a meal to talk about it, like he did someone else on here(allegedly). What a poncey take on the 'lets meet for a pint and settle it'

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Jordan on talksport now saying 'I believe there is a case to answer'

The **** is basing that assertion on absolutely fuck all.

 

[JPAMCR]

Unfortunately the deeply unpleasant memory of little lord jaw-jaw stuffing his ugly mouth throughout won't leave me

View attachment 104444

He looks like a fucking thunderbird.

 

[Bluearmy]

If the PL fails to prove their case, could there be a call for Richard Masters to publicly state why he pursued this line of action despite having little to no new evidence?
In other words, was undue pressure put on the PL to proceed with these charges?
If yes, then by whom?

He’ll resign before admitting that

 

[ballbag]

Steady on, the Rags were fuck all as a team in the 70's and 80's despite the media and no nowt fans believing they have been one of the best 2 teams, forever.

The other being the Dippers!

They're thick, though.

Liverpool fans won't/can't accept that their club was languishing in Div 2 for a decade before a sugar daddy got them promoted and laid the foundations of all their success for the decades to come.

United fans can't accept that the class of 92 was added to a spending spree from 89 onwards for Wallaces, Pallister, Webb, etc. Again, the foundations of their success for the decades to come.

But they'll tell you its not the same as City. It is though.

 

[Iassel]

What's the sad case saying about Brahim Diaz then?

In true Nick Harris style, he’s gotten himself confused and completely misinterpreted what the email in question states.

He *thinks* it shows that Diaz was unofficially at the club prior to turning 16, in contravention of the rules and that City covered it up.

What it *actually* shows is that City had agreed to sign him at 16, subject to FA approval.

It also shows that Diaz was coming over to train with the club, which is allowed, so long as the club inform the FA - which the emails say they did - and Cliff advises that he should return to Malaga periodically so as to not be ‘permanently’ in Manchester.

It also suggests that the club would have to enable the Diaz family moving to Manchester ‘for non-football reasons’ - ie the same thing every family of every foreign kid in English football academies has to do and every club has to navigate.

Net result - City and Malaga had agreed a deal for Diaz to join at 16 and were in the process of confirming with the FA. Diaz was training in Manchester, which is allowed and the club registered this with the FA. Harris has either mistakenly or deliberately misread the text in the email. You decide.

*edit to add* as mentioned before, I have a loose connection to the Diaz’s and so know he 100% wasn’t here ‘permanently’ before turning 16. I could expand, but Harris reads this forum religiously and I don’t want to do the work for him.

 

[supercity88]

Jordan on talksport now saying 'I believe there is a case to answer' but that City will probably get away with it as there are to many 'powerfull entities, and 'vested interests' for us to be found guilty.

He's changed hus tune since yesterday.

He was never going to say we didn't have a case to answer, but it's a clear change of opinion for him to say he thinks we'll get away with it. He's not giving us a glowing "innocent" verdict, but he's getting his ducks in a row so he can say "I told you so" when we are cleared. Stefan obviously schooled him enough for him to realise the case doesn't have much hope in finding us guilty.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

In true Nick Harris style, he’s gotten himself confused and completely misinterpreted what the email in question states.

He *thinks* it shows that Diaz was unofficially at the club prior to turning 16, in contravention of the rules and that City covered it up.

What it *actually* shows is that City had agreed to sign him at 16, subject to FA approval.

It also shows that Diaz was coming over to train with the club, which is allowed, so long as the club inform the FA - which the emails say they did - and Cliff advises that he should return to Malaga periodically so as to not be ‘permanently’ in Manchester.

It also suggests that the club would have to enable the Diaz family moving to Manchester ‘for non-football reasons’ - ie the same thing every family of every foreign kid in English football academies has to do and every club has to navigate.

Net result - City and Malaga had agreed a deal for Diaz to join at 16 and were in the process of confirming with the FA. Diaz was training in Manchester, which is allowed and the club registered this with the FA. Harris has either mistakenly or deliberately misread the text in the email. You decide.

I was going to say, if he thinks that is a panicked smoking gun then he needs to step away from the laptop. We can collectively not like how the footballing sausage gets made, but he is going to find another job of he is shocked and appalled by this. It's just a club navigating the rules - and being extra careful not to break them - in their candid emails.

 

[halfcenturyup]

In true Nick Harris style, he’s gotten himself confused and completely misinterpreted what the email in question states.

He *thinks* it shows that Diaz was unofficially at the club prior to turning 16, in contravention of the rules and that City covered it up.

What it *actually* shows is that City had agreed to sign him at 16, subject to FA approval.

It also shows that Diaz was coming over to train with the club, which is allowed, so long as the club inform the FA - which the emails say they did - and Cliff advises that he should return to Malaga periodically so as to not be ‘permanently’ in Manchester.

It also suggests that the club would have to enable the Diaz family moving to Manchester ‘for non-football reasons’ - ie the same thing every family of every foreign kid in English football academies has to do and every club has to navigate.

Net result - City and Malaga had agreed a deal for Diaz to join at 16 and were in the process of confirming with the FA. Diaz was training in Manchester, which is allowed and the club registered this with the FA. Harris has either mistakenly or deliberately misread the text in the email. You decide.

*edit to add* as mentioned before, I have a loose connection to the Diaz’s and so know he 100% wasn’t here ‘permanently’ before turning 16. I could expand, but Harris reads this forum religiously and I don’t want to do the work for him.

But, the club was panicking ......

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

He was never going to say we didn't have a case to answer, but it's a clear change of opinion for him to say he thinks we'll get away with it. He's not giving us a glowing "innocent" verdict, but he's getting his ducks in a row so he can say "I told you so" when we are cleared. Stefan obviously schooled him enough for him to realise the case doesn't have much hope in finding us guilty.

Jordan can spend the rest of his life telling blues with thick Manc accents "you weren't found innocent" and feeling very clever for doing so as long as we are cleared of the charges and continue to fill our trophy cabinet.