You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
If we had been told 6 months ago that September 2026 is " prime 115 liability stage judgment release territory." it would have stopped us all wondering why it was taking so fukin long! Nothing like a hindsight prediction! What makes him think this is that it's September and we haven't heard yet, I think if we get to October and still not heard we will be in "ultra prime 115 release stage" ;)@slbsn - sorry if already asked but what makes you think this. Ideally I would have liked this done before the transfer window closed but sadly that is not the case
Yea and we've spent millions on new players to make certain we don't win the league!Could it be revealed this international week.
Have the club already done a deal not to win the league for 2 years?
Might explain why we've gone to pot over the last 10 months.
Fuckin hell it was a joke lads,a shit one at 8am but a joke none the less.Yea and we've spent millions on new players to make certain we don't win the league!
As if anyone would believe we've done a deal to lose ffs
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
Sounds like it’s (best guess) going to be this month then.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 15,000
Yea and we've spent millions on new players to make certain we don't win the league!
That would be funny if it wasn't most likely true ....
JRockBlues
Well-Known Member
Not expecting any announcement till the middle of January (around the 15th is most likely). Quarter past one would be a good time.
Resurrection Joe...
Well-Known Member
Any man who kows when ' prime liability stage judgement release territory' is, is fooling themselves, I thought it was solar calendar based, and wholly dependant on rainfall on the last full moon.Sounds like it’s (best guess) going to be this month then.
After the legal beagles have come back from their summer holidays (sensible answer) and it’s the lead up to the Derby (for the conspiracy theorists), would be my guess.@slbsn why?
Or @slbsn has just done a @Prestwich_Blue and just thrown a random prediction out there because he’s bored.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 15,000
After the legal beagles have come back from their summer holidays (sensible answer) and it’s the lead up to the Derby (for the conspiracy theorists), would be my guess.
Or @slbsn has just done a @Prestwich_Blue and just thrown a random prediction out there because he’s bored.
Or maybe @slbsn has followed @Prestwich_Blue by making a prediction based on something they heard from someone they trusted. Just a thought.
Very un-lawyer like behaviour to just make a prediction based on nothing at all, imho.
geoff hammond
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 994
My optimism on the charges somehow goes up and down in conjunction with the team's performances.
If the judgement was announced today i feel it would be another kick in the balls.
Illogical - I know
If the judgement was announced today i feel it would be another kick in the balls.
Illogical - I know
dadnlad
Well-Known Member
I think team found out with 20 minutes to go against Brighton and threw towel inMy optimism on the charges somehow goes up and down in conjunction with the team's performances.
If the judgement was announced today i feel it would be another kick in the balls.
Illogical - I know
Should be taken from the ‘heel’ of the trailing foot. This stops having somebody with size 12s being offside, but somebody with size 7s being onside.Very much agree with only considering feet when VAR looks at offside.
It should be “stood offside”, not “Leaning offside”.
dadnlad
Well-Known Member
Hi Arsene ;)Should be taken from the ‘heel’ of the trailing foot. This stops having somebody with size 12s being offside, but somebody with size 7s being onside.
Yep, that was his suggestionHi Arsene ;)
DiscoSteve
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Mar 2010
- Messages
- 9,134
- Location
- 101 (was 201 in old money)
- Team supported
- Manchester City
wasnt that what Pep said in January/February? who's more ITK?Sounds like it’s (best guess) going to be this month then.
burning blue soul
Well-Known Member
I'm very interested in this thread. I'm just so very bored of being very interested, these days.
It's the longest VAR decision in history, and I'm sat in the stands waiting to cheer like a loon or give a 'wanker' sign.
It's the longest VAR decision in history, and I'm sat in the stands waiting to cheer like a loon or give a 'wanker' sign.
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
About legal timescales? Stefan I would think.wasnt that what Pep said in January/February? who's more ITK?
Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
It’s a thought but think I’d prefer any part of the boot. Otherwise direction of travel would affect decisions.Should be taken from the ‘heel’ of the trailing foot. This stops having somebody with size 12s being offside, but somebody with size 7s being onside.
a striker facing goal might have an advantageous over a defender facing away from goal.
I think Wenger’s initial suggestion only referenced the heel of the attackerIt’s a thought but think I’d prefer any part of the boot. Otherwise direction of travel would affect decisions.
a striker facing goal might have an advantageous over a defender facing away from goal.