PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[NeilMcnabTwoFooted]

Stefan interviewed on a City fan channel

watched it this morning Stefan as informative and articulate as always, beltin episode, haven’t heard him on talksport but no doubt he’ll run rings round perma-tan jordan & shouty jim white

 

[NeilMcnabTwoFooted]

As you might be or have been from Salford, then probably yes;-)

belter ha,ha,

 

[cheekybids]

There will be a clause in our PL membership terms covering and precluding this. Sadly

Then they can spend 5 years defending themselves against the charges of reputational damage. Maybe we should make it a large number…..115 has a nice ring to it.

 

[paulchapo]

Or a song….

115 charges and we're still here.....

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

View attachment 110970
Simon, why the long face?

Simone, why the long face?!

Fixed for you.

 

[cheekybids]

115 charges and we're still here.....

Needs whatabout City….

 

[Lord Blue]

Or a song….

whilst i'm not a massive fan whacko had a few...

what about us
smooth criminal
beat it
they don't care about us

 

[halfcenturyup]

Been top on this thread son.

If only I knew what I was talking about :P

 

[halfcenturyup]

Smarmy little prick! Smiling his head off like he's winning the argument!
Far from it, detest the guy!!!

That's not fair. I thought @projectriver made some good points :)

One point he started to make but couldn't finish because Jordan interrupted, probably because he could sense he was about to lose on that point as well, was when Jordan started talking about the club having a responsibility to speed up the process "for the good of football". He started to say it isn't the respondent who has to worry about the good of the game, they have to worry about clearing their name, it's the regulator of the PL, the claimant in this case, who should worry about the good of the game and not make allegations that they must know will take years to "prosecute" and with hardly any chance of winning. The PL could have easily made some "easy" allegations like wrongful disclosure and non-compliance to have a much quicker process and a much better chance of "winning". The question is why they didn't. I think the answer is obvious.

 

[halfcenturyup]

That's not fair. I thought @projectriver made some good points :)

One point he started to make but couldn't finish because Jordan interrupted, probably because he could sense he was about to lose on that point as well, was when Jordan started talking about the club having a responsibility to speed up the process "for the good of football". He started to say it isn't the defendant who has to worry about the good of the game, they have to worry about clearing their name, it's the regulator of the PL, the claimant in this case, who should worry about the good of the game and not make allegations that they must know will take years to "prosecute" and with hardly any chance of winning. The PL could have easily made some "easy" allegations like wrongful disclosure and non-compliance to have a much quicker process and a much better chance of "winning". The question is why they didn't. I think the answer is obvious.

BTW, another point @projectriver was really wanting to make, I think, but couldn't, really, was when they put that Liverpool idiot on talking about FSG doing things "the right way". You could just sense he wanted to talk about, amongst other things, the two cases of cheating FSG were found guilty of in the US, the hacking of our scouting database and the mythical 50 million for Stanley Park that enabled them not to fail FFP.

The right way, my arse.