PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Chappie]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

They've already provided a plausible explanation, which is why Cas found us not guilty .

 

[bennyboy]

Got the 115 from a rag last night in the pub after the parade about cheating City.
Told him not guilty yet and cheating is Wio sneeking out a back window to avoid a drugs test.
Stunned silence from him only broken by his girlfriend saying he got you there.
To be fair he was all right after that.lol.

 

[KS55]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

I don’t agree with your second para. The PL have to show some substantive action that follows from the emails. City could easily say something like:
” All companies that are regulated discuss how to test the limits of the regulations. We are not saying these conversations didn’t take place but there is no evidence that any of them were followed up with any action.(Example: In fact, in the case of email x, the managers concerned were explicitly told that such action would be contra to the regs.) This is what Khaldoon meant by “out of context.” What happened after these conversations is key. City do not have to explain the existence of the emails, the onus is on the PL to prove they were acted on, but I’m sure we will show the how and why of them.

 

[CC1]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

Thought it was up to the PL to prove that the emails are bona fide & NOT out of context???

 

[HelloCity]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

Some of the emails were written before FFP even existed.

Some only sound bad if you put a negative narrative on them.

Worth reading the CAS verdict before running your mouth.

 

[laserblue]

Spurs in the top ten for:
Insider trading
Cheese tasting
Failing to be champions
Fine fair-minded chairmen
The amount of cash in the safe for bungs.
Racist chants directed at themselves.

 

[laserblue]

You forgot Liverpool. Plucky underdog on a shoestring budget who miraculously and heroically won a premier league title

Despite the handicap of 64% of their playing staff being asthmatics.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

The emails were reviewed by CAS and deemed immaterial in terms of a guilty verdict, why would it be any different this time. Regardless, an email saying you have done something is nothing without actual evidence. The books show no wrongdoing so the emails are pretty irrelevant

 

[laserblue]

I get your point. But the IC will definitely ask our lawyers the very obvious question "Why these damaging emails would even exist if Man City has done nothing wrong or has nothing to hide?".

If our lawyers fail to provide a plausible explanation for the existence of these serious emails, then it's safe to assume that we are genuinely fucked. I just hope and pray that they have a reasonable explanation for that.

The emails are only proof of a conversation not an action. If I said in an email that I'd willingly kill Nigel Farage and then he gets murdered it doesn't prove I'd done it.

 

[KS55]

The emails were reviewed by CAS and deemed immaterial in terms of a guilty verdict, why would it be any different this time. Regardless, an email saying you have done something is nothing without actual evidence. The books show no wrongdoing so the emails are pretty irrelevant

As Stefan says in his X post, IF PROVED….By which he means if ACTION is proved. CAS were clear that no such proof was offered.