PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Prestwich_Blue said:
Anyone else seen this? It's shocking journalism from the BBC (surprise, surprise) and there are material inaccuracies in it.

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City 115 charges explained: What is latest on PSR & FFP charges?

A verdict on the 115 Manchester City Premier League charges could still be more than a year away - BBC Sport looks at the latest on the case.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Obviously a response to the gagging order. Basically you cannot shut us up if it's made to look like a statement of facts. Just hope that they have made an error that City's lawyers can nail them with. Or take a leaf out of Ferguson's rule book and ban them sighting the obvious attack within the statement.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Anyone else seen this? It's shocking journalism from the BBC (surprise, surprise) and there are material inaccuracies in it.

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City 115 charges explained: What is latest on PSR & FFP charges?

A verdict on the 115 Manchester City Premier League charges could still be more than a year away - BBC Sport looks at the latest on the case.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Q7ozWVYCR0nyW2rvPW.gif

That is absolutely hilarious.
I can imagine whoever wrote it was frothing at the mouth, snot dangling from each nostril and rocking back and forth.

Can't stop laughing. That piece sounds like they know we're getting nothing put on us at all, it's almost like the media saying a player were about to unveil is off to another club.

26gslTGBb2FLlwlNu.gif

Man City, boiling piss since 2008.
 
Blue Llama said:
Obviously a response to the gagging order. Basically you cannot shut us up if it's made to look like a statement of facts. Just hope that they have made an error that City's lawyers can nail them with. Or take a leaf out of Ferguson's rule book and ban them sighting the obvious attack within the statement.
Click to expand...
Should have been banned years ago. God knows why we still entertain questions from Slimy Stone who Im sure will be off with the Rags again on their pre season tour.
That ”article“ is pathetic. Just assumes we are guilty and when not if we face sanctions.
This should be the straw that the club says enough is enough and bans the Rag corporation from the ground.
As others have said, hope our lawyers go through what they have printed as it reads to me they are saying we are guilty.

Rags embarrassed so lets deflect and run yet another story about the 115, well 116 now with Jack fined for speeding which the BBC also thinks is worthy news to be on the sport pages,
 
Last edited:
invisibleandalone said:
Absolutely spot on. They don't care who they shit on if they can make a dollar. I've heard that some Premier League games may be played in America, when and WTF for ?
Click to expand...
None of this would have happened if the PL had a strong leader. Masters has been out of his depth since day one. There is nothing in his past career that suggests he would be able to cope with legal and financial pressures at such a high level. He has been manipulated into a position and is too far gone to get out. After watching him give evidence to two Commons Select Committees I have a much better understanding of what has happened. He was a rabbit in the headlights. Some of the Committee members ended up mocking him. The US influenced clubs have pushed him into a position and he has not been strong enough to resist. It has been a disastrous managerial failure, a bit like the Post Office scandal which could never have happened with strong leadership.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Anyone else seen this? It's shocking journalism from the BBC (surprise, surprise) and there are material inaccuracies in it.

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City 115 charges explained: What is latest on PSR & FFP charges?

A verdict on the 115 Manchester City Premier League charges could still be more than a year away - BBC Sport looks at the latest on the case.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Yes, I couldn't believe their idiocy in letting that be published. I've complained to them and requested an official response as below:

"Besides the article lacking any balance ( as evidenced through sub headers such as when will man city be punished?' and not will , the article also specifically says:

What do the 115 charges mean? Effectively that Man City cheated.

This is an outrageous and factually incorrect statement. The charges do not mean the club cheated. They mean only that they are accused of breaking regulations, and is not an indicator of their guilt or innocence.

Given that innocent Manchester City fans have been violently attacked and hurt by rival fans, who now see them as valid targets for their anger because of exactly this kind of inaccurate and inflammatory reporting, the BBC should do better to ensure factually correct and balanced statements in the future.

Manchester City deny all charges. An angle just as interesting, if not more so, would be to ask what happens to football governance and financial guidance in the sport if Manchester City, as with the uefa case already, are cleared of the charges against them."
 
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.