PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Joe Donachie said:
I heard Simon Jordan say the other day that he thinks there will be a settlement so that both clubs can get out of this tangled situation that we find ourselves in,

But I don’t agree with him, I think we will want total exoneration and clearance of are name, I even think the non cooperation will not be accepted by us either,

Its win or bust for us on these charges, I actually think it’s a bigger result for us than whatever happens on Saturday,

If we do get a unanimous decision in are favour of a not guilty win, then I am gonna hire out Mary D’s with all drinks at £1:15,

That will really boil the piss of every cry baby rival lol,
Click to expand...
I think the club would tell Pep to personally run the ball into our own net on Saturday if it meant non-cooperation, a smallish fine, and a statement that claimed the paperwork satisfied that that no major breaches had happened, all the sponsorship and player contracts were perfectly legal, and that the league and club were ready to draw a line under any and all previous FFP irregularities.
 
I read a snippet of a story by Goal, i generally find these a week out of date, and pandering to the German market but. It had a sports lawyer on saying all the usual punishments, but he did say that PL clubs would not believe, City had not bought the PL out if they dropped charges, i think it is no wonder he did not let anyone know his name.
So there are still 3 options innocent , guilty and dropped charges, the dropped charges would come with everyone on the case getting sacked by the PL for incompetence, so creating the excuse. But that would do City no good, Cash would do little either, especially as most would come from the lower leagues, a purge, move on all the G14 stooges from every committee and every sub committee, and all corridors of power, no contact with SKY for any G14 and their American allies.
 
Last year I remember Tolmie saying with certainty that Erling was coming to City. There were those who believed him and those who most certainly did not and were keen to make sure everyone knew it. Gradually Tolmie explained that he knew this not because of something he'd heard but because of something he had seen. Some time after Erling had signed he explained that he had seen forms concerning his medical insurance. This tells us that Tolmie is not an animated ventriloquist's dummy who simply repeats willy nilly what he hears but someone with contacts who listens and then evaluates it as evidence. This tweet is very definite, Tolmie is very sure and even though he hasn't identified the source we all know Tolmie well enough to know that we would be very wise to take it very seriously. I am certain one of the first things Tolmie has asked is if his source(s) is/are in a position to know or express a valid opinion and he must be satisfied on this point. Does experience show their opinion to be an informed and trustworthy one? If Tolmie is satisfied that the source is both credible and reliable. That doesn't mean that what Tolmie says will inevitably come to pass but it is to be taken seriously and is very encouraging. From me, and many others, thank you Tolmiw.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Last year I remember Tolmie saying with certainty that Erling was coming to City. There were those who believed him and those who most certainly did not and were keen to make sure everyone knew it. Gradually Tolmie explained that he knew this not because of something he'd heard but because of something he had seen. Some time after Erling had signed he explained that he had seen forms concerning his medical insurance. This tells us that Tolmie is not an animated ventriloquist's dummy who simply repeats willy nilly what he hears but someone with contacts who listens and then evaluates it as evidence. This tweet is very definite, Tolmie is very sure and even though he hasn't identified the source we all know Tolmie well enough to know that we would be very wise to take it very seriously. I am certain one of the first things Tolmie has asked is if his source(s) is/are in a position to know or express a valid opinion and he must be satisfied on this point. Does experience show their opinion to be an informed and trustworthy one? If Tolmie is satisfied that the source is both credible and reliable. That doesn't mean that what Tolmie says will inevitably come to pass but it is to be taken seriously and is very encouraging. From me, and many others, thank you Tolmiw.
Click to expand...
Tolmie is very good for mood music from the club itself. I've no doubt there's people in the club that think this is a matter of time. But there were people in the club, and therefore Tolmie as well, who thought we all but had Bellingham's signature on paper. It's not done till it's done.
 
Joe Donachie said:
I heard Simon Jordan say the other day that he thinks there will be a settlement so that both clubs can get out of this tangled situation that we find ourselves in,

But I don’t agree with him, I think we will want total exoneration and clearance of are name, I even think the non cooperation will not be accepted by us either,

Its win or bust for us on these charges, I actually think it’s a bigger result for us than whatever happens on Saturday,

If we do get a unanimous decision in are favour of a not guilty win, then I am gonna hire out Mary D’s with all drinks at £1:15,

That will really boil the piss of every cry baby rival lol,
Click to expand...

Jordan is just taking that line because rumours emerged about a settlement before Steffan went on TS and his comments were that in the corporate world people will settle if it gets the job done quickly and effectively.

I struggle to see how we successfully argue the non-cooperation charge. At CAS we presented evidence of financially sensitive information being leaked to the NY Times as our justification for closing shop. But CAS, whilst concerned, still fined us because the whole system falls apart if clubs aren't cooperating. We undoubtedly believe that our financials are robust and we've given the PL everything, but if they've requested specific documents and we haven't presented them then we haven't cooperated. We'll argue there was no need to, but again I think it's the fact the system relies on clubs cooperating so we'll get a fine as punishment.

That's fine (pun intended), as long as the main charges are dropped and it's categorically stated that whilst we've been fined for non-cooperation we did submit all requested evidence that was available and it has led the PL to drop the wider charges.

This time around we need to ensure that there's no confusion over non-cooperation and guilt, which is what Jordan and other cunts got so wrong with the CAS verdict. We didn't cooperate initially but then submitted to CAS everything that was required for the main charges to be dropped. That was a City win.
 
Can someone tell me in here on how in the hell bookies chances will somehow influence our cases whether we going to cleared or not?
 
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.