I do feel as an Arsenal supporter on here, you are genuinely trying your best to choose your wording carefully, but baring in mind our own particular bias/viewpoint, I do think you perhaps subliminally or unknown to yourself phrase things that can be seen as suggestive of guilt.
I would say, the PL getting this right, if their process is fair, shouldn’t exclude exoneration of City. The suggestion that if they don’t find us guilty, they have failed and they no longer have credible authority to govern the game, is a prejudice and a problem that the rest of the league have, or certainly influential members of the league and their support have.
Their processes are either fair or they’re not. Which is it.
I find the general implied presumption of guilt, well, understandable. What I find strange, is the lack of intelligence when trying to mask it.
For example, pretty much every pundit does it. When after clearly already having decided we are guilty and we are the ones stretching this out, they say something they think is 'nice'. Like, oh it is their fans I am thinking about here, they surely want this dealt with quickly. Or it is the players I feel for, they deserve this dealt with quickly to remove the 'cloud' (fuck off) over them.
That only works, if, you are starting from a position of presuming innocence. THEN, you can 'care' for the fans, or want players to have recognition. But if you are starting from a position of assuming guilt, which they continually show in no uncertain terms, then I'm sorry, this attempt to look considerate, is just dishonest posturing. And I actually hate it, more than when they imply guilt, because that I can almost forgive. Bias and stupidity, I can accept, the acting though, get fucked.
Neville does it often when he starts with 'I'm against ffp but, the rules need..' etc. That's like starting something racist with 'I have a black friend'.
And you are right, the post you reply does it too, attempts to 'mask' the bias which is evident elsewhere. Twats the lot of them.