PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

117 M34 said:
Any idea what they proposed we plead guilty to and what the punishment offered was?

My thinking based on absolutely nothing is that the club wouldn't have a settlement agreement for anything financial but maybe would for the non cooperation as long as the punishment wasn't points based.

Premier league statement being very clear that city provided irrefutable evidence against the financial charges but that we accept some responsibility in not cooperating and have accepted a £20m fine and 5 point deduction suspended for a year.
Everyone saves face and we don't have to have a drawn out trial.
Click to expand...
Not happening, Khaldoon said we will not accept any punishment of any kind and he was looking forward to us defending the accusations, he’s a top fella, no one in the right mind should fuck with him, he’s top class.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
He's certainly been more circumspect. Perhaps the occaisional lapse into "falsley inflating the market", territory. Definitely a lot of "sovereign state" - but I imagine contesting that won't be a priority - too complex and indesrete.
Click to expand...
Yeah, not sure the state owned accusations would stick. Is it even defamatory? Not sure it is.

‘Falsely inflating the market’ is sufficiently ambiguous and nebulous to not be defamatory imo. Plus, maybe we have at some points in the last 16 years tbf.

Plus neither relate to what we have been accused of, and thereby will have been, upon being cleared, established as demonstrably false.

It’s suggestions that the accounts are in any way false where the motherlode lies. Carragher (and I think Neville) has definitely done so in recent weeks.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
He's certainly been more circumspect. Perhaps the occaisional lapse into "falsley inflating the market", territory. Definitely a lot of "sovereign state" - but I imagine contesting that won't be a priority - too complex and indesrete.
Click to expand...
Strangely enough "indes re te" is Spanish for "you are really there". Who ever said we weren't?
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Yeah, not sure the state owned accusations would stick. Is it even defamatory? Not sure it is.

‘Falsely inflating the market’ is sufficiently ambiguous and nebulous to not be defamatory imo. Plus, maybe we have at some points in the last 16 years tbf.

Plus neither relate to what we have been accused of, and thereby will have been, upon being cleared, established as demonstrably false.

It’s suggestions that the accounts are in any way false where the motherlode lies. Carragher (and I think Neville) has definitely done so in recent weeks.
Click to expand...
But the accusations are that our accounts are false so they are allowed to report that
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Yeah, not sure the state owned accusations would stick. Is it even defamatory? Not sure it is.

‘Falsely inflating the market’ is sufficiently ambiguous and nebulous to not be defamatory imo. Plus, maybe we have at some points in the last 16 years tbf.

It’s suggestions that the accounts are in any way false where the motherlode lies. Carragher (and I think Neville) has definitely done so in recent weeks.
Click to expand...

"State-owned" in itself is not defamatory, I suppose, but it can be incorrect and, if that fact had been put to them, and the term is still used in a derogatory context, would there be no recourse?
 
KS55 said:
Fair enough. I think all PL clubs should be registered British companies or organizations. Level playing field and all that. Both City and CFG are British companies.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure all clubs are UK companies, but, yes, I know what you mean.
 
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
✖
  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.