PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

citizen_maine said:
I very much doubt we'll find out in advance of its release
Click to expand...
I would expect for some news to seep out that it’s coming, even if not the outcome itself, but my guess would be maybe only 24-48 hours in advance. Just a hunch though of course!
If it does get announced completely out of the blue I’ll be surprised, but we shall see.
 
KS55 said:
Yes, good post. One thing that gets me is the fact that journalists are deliberately misleading their readers to get clicks or to further their propaganda. (I’m sure they know the likely truth.) It treats their readers as inferiors and is despicable. The journo’s first duty is to inform, none of that happens in this case. Pravda is a good comparison.
Click to expand...
Prefer a bit of Armani me, Prada's a tad too tight fitting...
 
petrusha said:
If anyone that ignorant offers me an opinion of the case, I ask them to explain to me exactly what we're accused of. They never can so I tell them I won't discuss it with people who know nothing about the proceedings. This, by the way, includes lawyers I know who are adamant that City are guilty as charged and should really know better.

Theirs is a view born of ignorance about the case, but I don't actually blame people who aren't inclined to follow everything about City online for assuming that we've done what we're accused of. Remember what a very eminent gentleman said when he referred to matters being "organised and clear". Everything has been presented to the public so that anyone who doesn't do in-depth research would unquestioningly believe that version of events.

The original Der Spiegel revelations were presented as a smoking gun and not as merely a ground for concern. Yes, they read badly for City, but the coverage both in the German outlet and elsewhere was uniformly hysterical. No one cared to point out that, just because something was discussed in an email, it doesn't mean it happened. Nor did anyone pick up on the fact that comments presented as betraying an intention to break the rules might actually disclose a plan to circumvent them with no breach, as millions of legitimate businesses across the globe do on a daily basis.

This assumption of City being caught bang to rights has underpinned basically all mainstream media coverage since then. I therefore understand non-City fans who don't wish to investigate further assuming that the evidence must bear out a damaging conclusion for the club. What I can't forgive is the attitude of the journalists and press outlets themselves.

There have been two or three top posts on this issue by @gordondaviesmoustache recently and, like him, I feel astonished that it's impossible to call to mind a serious journalist - not a single fucking one - who's written a piece countenancing that we might not be guilty. Even Martin Samuel, that rare ally of ours, approaches the issue from a perspective of the rules being flawed and aimed at protectionism benefiting a handful of clubs.

Now, we don't know what evidence there is outwith the public domain, and maybe the PL's investigation has yielded a comprehensive and compelling body of evidence that will amply demonstrate City's guilt. But based on what's within the public realm, that would seem highly unlikely, while it seems easy to contemplate how the club could easily have achieved its objectives over the period at hand without breaching the rules that the PL claims we did. For business people like those in the top positions at our club, that really wouldn't be unduly challenging.

I wouldn't have expected the media to go all in and bat for City by any means. I don't expect everyone to like us. Having risen to our position of prominence based on the injection of as cash sum in ten figures, we aren't exactly the poster boys for romance (though it's a sport in which romance, at least at top level, has been dead for decades) and I don't ask for us to be reported as though we are. I did previously expect impartiality in our coverage, though, by which I mean some recognition that the accusations against us might not be true.

As some people on here know, I have for my sins a long and deep connection with Russia. I'm enough of an FOC to have spent time here when Pravda was still the major daily print news source and before it gained additional editorial freedom in the era of glasnost. I've also spoken to people who were employed by this august publication in its heyday.

My experience is that they don't generally delude themselves. They'll usually admit that they were propagandists. That puts them a step up from most of City's media enemies, who seem to want not only to peddle a tawdry succession of half-truths and untruths, but also to gaslight us into thinking there's some moral campaign behind what they do. Risibly, it appears that some of the WhatsApp group lay claim to being the heirs of Woodward and Bernstein.

Fuck off, lads and the odd lass. We know full well you're shabby and rancid intellectual prostitutes looking for what best helps to line your pockets and coming down on the side of an odious coterie of American disaster capitalists whose only desire is to ratchet up the value of their investment. I'm far from dewy-eyed about our own stakeholders, but at least I don't lie for a living on their behalf.

And that's what our media detractors do - at best, proclaiming half-truths, but more often outright lies. As I recently said, just look at the mendacity that followed the CAS award, when the Panel found no evidence against City on the main charge. City selected two of the arbitrators, we were told. UEFA's statute of limitations applied when there'd be no limitation issues under PL proceedings. The CAS standard of proof was too high. And UEFA were remiss in failing to appeal the CAS award.

Arrant, fallacious bullshit, all of it. And the fact that all of that spread within the mainstream media like wildfire tells you everything you need to know about those in that field. Regrettably, people will and do believe the untruths and half-truths unless they know better, but I reserve my real disdain for the organ-grinders and not the monkeys.

TL, DR - People who know nothing about the case but spout about City's guilt are cunts, of course. But it's in the media where you'll find the more outrageous and despicable cunts, so don't forget to target hurl the bulk of your contempt their way. After all, however much you generate for them, you can rest assured it's fully merited.
Click to expand...
Well that was a novelty Peter, not having you interpret legal jargon into your special brand of English.
Thanks instead for a direct viewpoint on the disgraceful bias the media has portrayed.
They sell not news but their views of news so I enjoyed every word you penned.
Thanks again my friend.
 
The release will be the well established process, one week before the public announcement the PL and City wil receive draft versions. This will be in case there are documentation howlers the IC have made and can be corrected before the public release. This also provides an opportunity for the PL to pass the ruling to the legacy media so they can distort it, mangle it and twist the narrative no matter how much success we have achieved. Don't ever expect anything from the legacy media other than a poisonous, twisted and totally biased narrative. We all know why,
 
Goats left knee said:
I work with this pool idiot, goes on like there’s a big cloud over us, man cheaty etc, says we are like OJ Simpson, even if cleared of all charges but get a fine for non co operation, that’s guilty in his envious eyes. Does anyone else suffer fools like this?
Click to expand...
Yep. Bloody Gooner. Doesn't stop until I ask him to name just one charge.
 
petrusha said:
If anyone that ignorant offers me an opinion of the case, I ask them to explain to me exactly what we're accused of. They never can so I tell them I won't discuss it with people who know nothing about the proceedings. This, by the way, includes lawyers I know who are adamant that City are guilty as charged and should really know better.

Theirs is a view born of ignorance about the case, but I don't actually blame people who aren't inclined to follow everything about City online for assuming that we've done what we're accused of. Remember what a very eminent gentleman said when he referred to matters being "organised and clear". Everything has been presented to the public so that anyone who doesn't do in-depth research would unquestioningly believe that version of events.

The original Der Spiegel revelations were presented as a smoking gun and not as merely a ground for concern. Yes, they read badly for City, but the coverage both in the German outlet and elsewhere was uniformly hysterical. No one cared to point out that, just because something was discussed in an email, it doesn't mean it happened. Nor did anyone pick up on the fact that comments presented as betraying an intention to break the rules might actually disclose a plan to circumvent them with no breach, as millions of legitimate businesses across the globe do on a daily basis.

This assumption of City being caught bang to rights has underpinned basically all mainstream media coverage since then. I therefore understand non-City fans who don't wish to investigate further assuming that the evidence must bear out a damaging conclusion for the club. What I can't forgive is the attitude of the journalists and press outlets themselves.

There have been two or three top posts on this issue by @gordondaviesmoustache recently and, like him, I feel astonished that it's impossible to call to mind a serious journalist - not a single fucking one - who's written a piece countenancing that we might not be guilty. Even Martin Samuel, that rare ally of ours, approaches the issue from a perspective of the rules being flawed and aimed at protectionism benefiting a handful of clubs.

Now, we don't know what evidence there is outwith the public domain, and maybe the PL's investigation has yielded a comprehensive and compelling body of evidence that will amply demonstrate City's guilt. But based on what's within the public realm, that would seem highly unlikely, while it seems easy to contemplate how the club could easily have achieved its objectives over the period at hand without breaching the rules that the PL claims we did. For business people like those in the top positions at our club, that really wouldn't be unduly challenging.

I wouldn't have expected the media to go all in and bat for City by any means. I don't expect everyone to like us. Having risen to our position of prominence based on the injection of as cash sum in ten figures, we aren't exactly the poster boys for romance (though it's a sport in which romance, at least at top level, has been dead for decades) and I don't ask for us to be reported as though we are. I did previously expect impartiality in our coverage, though, by which I mean some recognition that the accusations against us might not be true.

As some people on here know, I have for my sins a long and deep connection with Russia. I'm enough of an FOC to have spent time here when Pravda was still the major daily print news source and before it gained additional editorial freedom in the era of glasnost. I've also spoken to people who were employed by this august publication in its heyday.

My experience is that they don't generally delude themselves. They'll usually admit that they were propagandists. That puts them a step up from most of City's media enemies, who seem to want not only to peddle a tawdry succession of half-truths and untruths, but also to gaslight us into thinking there's some moral campaign behind what they do. Risibly, it appears that some of the WhatsApp group lay claim to being the heirs of Woodward and Bernstein.

Fuck off, lads and the odd lass. We know full well you're shabby and rancid intellectual prostitutes looking for what best helps to line your pockets and coming down on the side of an odious coterie of American disaster capitalists whose only desire is to ratchet up the value of their investment. I'm far from dewy-eyed about our own stakeholders, but at least I don't lie for a living on their behalf.

And that's what our media detractors do - at best, proclaiming half-truths, but more often outright lies. As I recently said, just look at the mendacity that followed the CAS award, when the Panel found no evidence against City on the main charge. City selected two of the arbitrators, we were told. UEFA's statute of limitations applied when there'd be no limitation issues under PL proceedings. The CAS standard of proof was too high. And UEFA were remiss in failing to appeal the CAS award.

Arrant, fallacious bullshit, all of it. And the fact that all of that spread within the mainstream media like wildfire tells you everything you need to know about those in that field. Regrettably, people will and do believe the untruths and half-truths unless they know better, but I reserve my real disdain for the organ-grinders and not the monkeys.

TL, DR - People who know nothing about the case but spout about City's guilt are cunts, of course. But it's in the media where you'll find the more outrageous and despicable cunts, so don't forget to target hurl the bulk of your contempt their way. After all, however much you generate for them, you can rest assured it's fully merited.
Click to expand...
"Arrant, fallacious bullshit".........Superb!! I'm using that one!

Absolutely excellent post mate. Top bins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top