Aren’t you going to tell us which team you support?
We’re all waiting
I'm thinking this is the case after his comment:Is there any chance the tribunal is already happening? Seems a bit weird that the allegations have been published and there is a year or two before any defence can be made.
Not true. If the basis for which both the conviction and the potential decision by the appeal board not to overturn it, is that we have commiting fraud (which it must be), then the next stage is the big boy courts. Then the government would likely become involved because of the inability for football to self regulate in a manner by which a team can be punished by a panel for an apparent act of fraud that the legal courts haven't prosecuted onI think by now it’s well established that he doesn’t support City. Irrespective of that though, on this occasion I think he’s right about the very limited circumstances under which we can pursue this further, should we get found guilty by the IP, namely that unless the judgment is preposterous and they haven’t followed procedure correctly, then an appeal to a 2nd IP would be the end of the line…..
My understanding of projectriver's posts is certainly that the PL is going to have to present very compelling evidence indeed to the IC because of the gravity of the charges. He believes however that our case depends on the question of sponsorship and in particular the funding of the sponsorship. I believe he maintains that the PL has to find evidence of deception and/or fraudulent intent or they cannot surmount the obstacle of time barring. Deception and fraudulent intent are (I submit!) matters which an IC is in no way competent to decide. If they did City would appeal to the courts immediately - unless of course we were banged to rights!!! In which case we may try to take the punishment but it seems unlikely.I don't think @projectriver @petrusha and the rest are saying that at all. The IP is completely competent to conclude the club has breached its contract with the PL in a civil environment, even if it implies fraudulent activity.
I think the serious nature of the allegations raises the cogency of the evidence required to a level that is very unlikely to be available to the PL, which is why they are generally optimistic as to the outcome.
I’d have to go back and check, but I’m pretty sure that’s not what Stefan said, and it was he that I was trying to clumsily paraphraseNot true. If the basis for which both the conviction and the potential decision by the appeal board not to overturn it, is that we have commiting fraud (which it must be), then the next stage is the big boy courts. Then the government would likely become involved because of the inability for football to self regulate in a manner by which a team can be punished by a panel for an apparent act of fraud that the legal courts haven't prosecuted on
Who in their right mind would be against reckless owners putting their clubs" existence at risk?
Hence why neither UEFA or the PL have ever levied the word "fraud" at City, even after City goaded them to dare use it.Not if found guilty of fraud. We would take it to High Court, forget tribunals and Premier League rules at that stage.
Worth watching.
What you said wasn't shit in the slightest, just a different approach that's all, but just as valid mate. :-)
Seems to me this is where we are at -stalemate, who blinks first !Hence why neither UEFA or the PL have ever levied the word "fraud" at City, even after City goaded them to dare use it.
The moment they do, the whole process will be taken out of the PL's bullshit tribunal process, & into the UK Law Courts.
The PL are trying to avoid this at all costs, because they know it'll kill the validity of their FFP/PSR at a stroke.
Just like UEFA's attempt, UEFA's FFP bullshit tribunal = City guilty.
CAS framework based on EU Law = City not guilty.