PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

This sick freak was deranged before his missus past.

He is one of several heads of the snake who have been undermining our club since day one.

They are so deeply embedded in their hatred and delusion that they've lost all reality and objectivity.

If you look beyond their shit, there is often a common background denominator.

These lying,casual racists have much in common with manics like Chemical Ali, Putin and an infamous Austrian.
Godwin's Law!
 
Slightly off topic I know but is there still a chance that all the charges will be put to bed (in our favour of course) faster than the last accepted timetable. In case people have forgotten since it's seems like forever since they were discussed it was a hearing in autumn with a judgement released in early summer next year. If any appeal was lodged then it was estimated that would be concluded by summer 2026.
 
Since Nick Harris seemingly has no qualms about posting private messages, here’s an unsolicited text message that he sent me in the early hours a while ago. It’s not normal behaviour for a journalist. I genuinely think he needs help.

View attachment 108551
Thank your lucky stars it wasn’t a dick pic.
 
All the mood music from within the club indicates the charges are being systematically destroyed year by year. The confidence levels are even higher now than on "charges day" back in February 2023. This begs the question, how the hell is the IC/PL going to extricate itself from this omnishambles. I suspect they will go down the route of "NOT PROVEN" for the substantive charges, i.e., a compromise based on the verdict used in Scottish criminal law. They will no doubt throw in a non-cooperation verdict, probably with another ridiculously high fine, to appease the City haters and afford the PL a wee bit of credibility. This is all my own guesswork, but I can see a situation where the PL will claim a complete lack of jurisdiction over City's sponsors, Etihad, Etisalat, and Aabar, making it impossible to prove the contracts were in any sense illegitimate. I think the same will apply to the Al Jazira/Mancini contract. All independent experts suggest the image rights charges are completely dead in the water, as anything that was dubious would be investigated by HMRC, who clearly are not the slightest bit interested.

So what would the legal advice be to City and the sponsors given a "Not Proven" outcome. The sponsors would have to demonstrate that the IC/PL ruling would cause material damage to their businesses. I doubt they could prove this, so they would probably take no further action. That just leaves the club's response. I'm guessing again, but I think a settlement whereby the PL stated publicly and unequivocally that all historical investigations into City's accounts from 2008 to the present day have been terminated in perpetuity. Of course, the downside would be that this outcome would allow the professional City haters to continue to scrape a subsistence living as click bait life forms, i.e., continuing to spread the inevitable slurs and tropes. Hopefully City's response would involve a newly uplifted long term partnership with Etihad Airways, Let's hope it's a whopper and a world beater, as befitting for the best team in the world.

One thing we have all learned since 2008 is the following: when Khaldoon Mubarak says something is going to happen, we can be pretty sure it will, and that includes his "plenty to say" promise in last year's end-of-season review. Let's just say the chances of Richard Masters being the CEO of the Premier League after this case are virtually zero. He could perhaps form a comedy duo; the "Masters and Harris" podcast would be a sensation with at least 20 subscribers.
Inject that last paragaph into my veins.
 
All the mood music from within the club indicates the charges are being systematically destroyed year by year. The confidence levels are even higher now than on "charges day" back in February 2023. This begs the question, how the hell is the IC/PL going to extricate itself from this omnishambles. I suspect they will go down the route of "NOT PROVEN" for the substantive charges, i.e., a compromise based on the verdict used in Scottish criminal law. They will no doubt throw in a non-cooperation verdict, probably with another ridiculously high fine, to appease the City haters and afford the PL a wee bit of credibility. This is all my own guesswork, but I can see a situation where the PL will claim a complete lack of jurisdiction over City's sponsors, Etihad, Etisalat, and Aabar, making it impossible to prove the contracts were in any sense illegitimate. I think the same will apply to the Al Jazira/Mancini contract. All independent experts suggest the image rights charges are completely dead in the water, as anything that was dubious would be investigated by HMRC, who clearly are not the slightest bit interested.

So what would the legal advice be to City and the sponsors given a "Not Proven" outcome. The sponsors would have to demonstrate that the IC/PL ruling would cause material damage to their businesses. I doubt they could prove this, so they would probably take no further action. That just leaves the club's response. I'm guessing again, but I think a settlement whereby the PL stated publicly and unequivocally that all historical investigations into City's accounts from 2008 to the present day have been terminated in perpetuity. Of course, the downside would be that this outcome would allow the professional City haters to continue to scrape a subsistence living as click bait life forms, i.e., continuing to spread the inevitable slurs and tropes. Hopefully City's response would involve a newly uplifted long term partnership with Etihad Airways, Let's hope it's a whopper and a world beater, as befitting for the best team in the world.

One thing we have all learned since 2008 is the following: when Khaldoon Mubarak says something is going to happen, we can be pretty sure it will, and that includes his "plenty to say" promise in last year's end-of-season review. Let's just say the chances of Richard Masters being the CEO of the Premier League after this case are virtually zero. He could perhaps form a comedy duo; the "Masters and Harris" podcast would be a sensation with at least 20 subscribers.

Realistically we would all or should all take that, the noise before it all was dying down before the charges and will do again 2-3 years later.

A non guilty verdict would have no real world change anyway, to big Dave down the pub with his masters in fruit machines and his 1990 Sharp United kit on (although somewhat tight now) would still say we cheated.

So called sports journalists, a small proportion of City fans and an even smaller proportion of other fans will read the judgement. At the most they will read a journalist’s interpretation from it.

I don’t care what anyone thinks, let’s keep winning trophies and spoil the Klopp party.

Call us what you like, as long as I can call us Champions.

Oh and if Harris is reading this, you’re entitled to a different view (but what happens next just accept it and move on, running articles disagreeing with a process (if that is the case) because you don’t like the outcome, but would have been praising it if it had gone your way, makes no sense!).
 
I think the pl need to put a stop to this quickly. The pl know they have nothing on City.
Its getting out of hand, can you imagine what its going to be like in 2 years time ?
Not going to happen.
Liverpool and United fans do have the smoking gun which they plan to present to the IC. They will ensure we are stripped of all titles won within and outside the periods covered in the charges.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.