PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Blue Llama]

What did Sutton say in response?

Quickly said, know nothing about it and changed the subject

 

[BlueAnorak]

There is no time bar

So many say, but the charges are clearly associated with civil contract law - WRT our contact(s) with the PL. That is Civil litigation.

 

[Keeper!]

Does anyone think the PL will still go ahead with the case if the rumours are true just to save some face and to give the impression the PL tried to charge City with the 115 allegations, rather than just giving up and trying to agree a deal with City in private? UEFA tried again and lost at CAS. There are numerous instances of this happening with the Police, the CPS, newspapers and other organisations that knew they were wrong and wouldn’t win the case, but they still went ahead with the case and lost.

100%, it would look even worse for the league if they withdrew the charges now, a PR disaster.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Quickly said, know nothing about it and changed the subject

Hilarious.

 

[moggymoz]

Listen to what you are saying. It makes no sense.
The ball had been passed to City players for them to make an attempt at goal, they were stopped from taking the shot because of unlawful challenges.
It's the same, exactly the same.
You saying that because Gvardiol hadn't put the ball under his control the defender has the right to take him out?

What the fuck has this got to do with this threads topic.

 

[manimanc]

100%, it would look even worse for the league if they withdrew the charges now, a PR disaster.

Let's be honest they've already made a soup sandwich of everything that's happened recently.

 

[Chris in London]

Probably, the worst case for many of the older charges is we could be found guilty of the offence but not punished because of the time bar. But I hold that many of the older charges were there to put us in a bad light as a perennial lieing and cheating organisation.

No. Either the conduct was concealed deliberately in which case the limitation period is basically irrelevant, or it wasn’t concealed deliberately in which case (a) the claim is statute barred and (b) the claim fails on the merits in any event. There’s no middle ground where we get found guilty but not punished.

 

[burning blue soul]

What the fuck has this got to do with this threads topic.

I got in too deep and too far to pull the handbrake on the off topic slide. Won't happen again.
Talking of handbrakes, my Nissan is jumping slightly when I engage the electronic handbrake. Anyone know anything about this?

 

[bigA]

Circumcised or entire?

Couldn't have been circumcised. Rumour has it that he went for a circumcision and the surgeon said it was fucking impossible as there is no end to this prick.

 

[Paladin]

It was absolutely not a penalty in any way. They ran into each other after Gvardiol had attempted a pot shot from a cross. It was a ludicrously poor decision and smacked of a refereeing team that has never played the game.

Are you saying only people who have played the game know what a foul is? I'm sure the individual members of the refereeing team will have played football at some point in their lives. Or is there a certain level of football you need to have played at in order to determine that this incident shouldn't have been a penalty?

99% of fans - 99% of whom have never been paid to play football - don't think it was a penalty. No specialist football knowledge is needed for that opinion. The referee yesterday simply made a bad call. His playing experience has nothing to do with it.

Edit. Not sure why this is in the charges thread.