PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Slowly…
Bit of Dickens...Im sure yer all familiar with...Bleak House.
replace PL V MCFC ....with...

Jarndyce and Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, over the course of time, become so complicated, that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least; but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises. Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable young people have married into it; innumerable old people have died out of it. Scores of persons have deliriously found themselves made parties in Jarndyce and Jarndyce without knowing how or why; whole families have inherited legendary hatreds with the suit. The little plaintiff or defendant, who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce and Jarndyce should be settled, has grown up, possessed himself of a real horse, and trotted away into the other world. Fair wards of court have faded into mothers and grandmothers; a long procession of Chancellors has come in and gone out.
 
It's really quite strange that all of these football fans were caught completely by surprise by the corruption of the FFP system, 14 years after it was implemented against City.

It's human nature, I suppose, only to be concerned with things that directly affect you. None of those fans thought they would caught up in this mess, but, yes, they could have listened more carefully.
 
You do realise Manchester is one of the fastest growing cities in Europe don't you? I'm not saying he's perfect but if you're expecting a mayor from another party to be in charge here then I have news for you. You could pin a red rosette on a wheely bin and it would win.

Personally, I can see the changes he's trying to make, but it's too early to decide if they're right or not.
You think it's growing because of him? - Rather despite him or inconsequentially at best.
I realise I should have put a line on about - "that applies to most politicians", I know how precious people get.
Anyway - not for this thread.
 
You think it's growing because of him? - Rather despite him or inconsequentially at best.
I realise I should have put a line on about - "that applies to most politicians", I know how precious people get.
Anyway - not for this thread.
I didn't hear his TS interview so can't say for certain what his viewpoint was but sadly politicians are very rarely experts in any subject matter, they are by very nature of the job, jacks (and jills) of all trades. We have seen lots of people struggle with the nuances of the financial rules of the PL and politicians are no different. Up until they started handing out points deductions, nobody other than ourselves invested much time into it, so we're far ahead of the game and it makes us look superior to the newbies, Burnham included.
 
No. Most tribunals don’t have an overarching ‘costs follow the event’ principle like civil courts do. Sometimes costs can be awarded when a party has acted unreasonably, such as in an employment tribunal, but that power is provided by statute.

Parties will almost certainly have to bear their own costs in this particular jurisdiction.
I seem to remember that CFG paid our costs re UEFA . Can anyone confirm?
 
Bit of Dickens...Im sure yer all familiar with...Bleak House.
replace PL V MCFC ....with...

Jarndyce and Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, over the course of time, become so complicated, that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least; but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises. Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable young people have married into it; innumerable old people have died out of it. Scores of persons have deliriously found themselves made parties in Jarndyce and Jarndyce without knowing how or why; whole families have inherited legendary hatreds with the suit. The little plaintiff or defendant, who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce and Jarndyce should be settled, has grown up, possessed himself of a real horse, and trotted away into the other world. Fair wards of court have faded into mothers and grandmothers; a long procession of Chancellors has come in and gone out.
The real life case on which JvJ was based was eventually settled. No heirs received anything, the whole inheritance was expended on ……..oh, lawyers fees.
 
Burnham is just a symptom of a wider issue with people finding they NEED to talk about things they clearly dont understand and thinking if they say it enough times and shout it loud enough then the faux air of authority that they project is enough for them to speak on subjects they know very little about.

Our charges are rife with this, the amount of people who feel that they must speak about them despite have little to no experience on the subject is ridiculous, i get coming on here and discussing but its wound its way in to the media, podcasts, youtube, absolutely everywhere, i mean this week alone we have had tony bellew (scouse boxer who wasnt to intelligent before a few blows to the head) and burnham (career politician with no real expertise on any matter) speak on it, what on earth do either of those bring to the table apart from noise, what happened to it is better to remain silent and be thought an idiot than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
 
Has anyone else noticed that the whole chelsea thing about dodgy payments to agents is being completely ignored….even though it’s admitted!
Stefan rightly still highlighting it but
Essentially if they are charged they are going to have a similar number of charges as us because o yes a number of payments over a period and will affect the numbers in accounts for years after

It’s almost like because they are shit no one cares
Surely the rules are the rules for everyone
Not just City
I watched Stefan on YT with Rory Jennings, talking about Chelsea's situation.
The comments were all predictably "what about City" ...but one mentioned the 115 charges, which had me thinking...
our allegations, as we know, are actually 5 breaches but with many incidences under each one... So how many have Chelsea got? Stefan mentions off the book payments and their accounts being wrong - so for how many years? Surely they must be getting up to the hundred mark or more?
 

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.