flb
Well-Known Member
The way I’ve read it is they’re going to leave it upto clubs as a collective to appeal it , the tyrany of the majority and all that jazzThe premier league won’t appeal they were already moaning about legal costs
The way I’ve read it is they’re going to leave it upto clubs as a collective to appeal it , the tyrany of the majority and all that jazzThe premier league won’t appeal they were already moaning about legal costs
So all the clubs can gang up and do what exactly?The way I’ve read it is they’re going to leave it upto clubs as a collective to appeal it , the tyrany of the majority and all that jazz
They don't know the outcome, that's why they're being cautious and using the APT case aftermath as a 'what could happen again' warning. This email could have been sent weeks ago for all we know.I agree it's probably just cautionary but would they have sent it out especially after what spitty has said in the past if we were going to be found in breach of the major charges
Force the PL to appeal, presumably. I imagine there’d be a fair few clubs reluctant to waste any more money on this though.So all the clubs can gang up and do what exactly?
almost 20k people he/she is a idiot but a lots if people listens so this matterspeople still follow this idiot?
My lad has more on twitch. 20k is nothing.almost 20k people he/she is a idiot but a lots if people listens so this matters
I’m surprised anyone was expecting a completely clear-cut verdict to be honest, given the breadth of the charges. As with CAS, all that matters is that we beat the main charges.Would be so typical for a non clear verdict to be reached, and it drags on even longer. I can really see this happening tbqh
Mad that people are trying to determine if this is good/bad news for us.
Sky Sports don’t have a clue. This email will be a standard procedure that most broadcasters participate in. There are legal ramifications to consider (if their pundits slander a company/club).
If Sky Sports had any inside information it would be headline news. Why would they leak it via The Daily Mail? :’)
This is a company telling its staff - let’s not get sued.
What’s strange about that was it was the hardly the worst comment we’ve faced in the last 2 years but very promptly seized upon.I think City probably warned Sky after that Tim Sherwood incident, and they don’t want to risk us taking legal action next time.
Maybe the straw that broke the camel’s back? Or maybe we felt more emboldened once the hearing was over?What’s strange about that was it was the hardly the worst comment we’ve faced in the last 2 years but very promptly seized upon.
I don't think you can charge a club with 115 offences and come out with statement.
It screams of incompetency from the board of the PL that they charged a club with that many offences yet couldn't strike one win. All while spending millions of the PL clubs money to do so and risk being sued at the end of it by City themselves for even more millions.
What's the saying, if you come for the king you better not miss?
I think they end up basically saying we couldn't get City to cooperate with he evidence so had deal with limited information available. That way, our non-cooperation throws doubt onto the fire that we are by proxy possibly guilty because we're not allowing the PL to have any access to our emails etc and other required info..
We win on a technicality.
I do think we are innocent by the way. I just think this is how it will play out because I don't for one minute think city will have given the PL anything.
Maybe the straw that broke the camel’s back? Or maybe we felt more emboldened once the hearing was over?