PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[PSmyth07]

How are these emails new though if they're watermarked with CAS in the top left?

 

[ChicagoBlue]

We were found not guilty in a proper court and without new evidence I fully expect us to be found not guilty again.

If the PL processes are fair and equitable, that is how it should be, I believe.

While the logic sounds good, it potentially falls apart IF the charges are not exactly the same, and brought by a different body operating under different rules.

Of course. IF the charges and rules were the same, one would reasonably expect the same legal outcome. However, they’re not only not the same, but are being heard by a different “court” under different “laws.”

Therein lies jeopardy…even if I agree that we have done nothing wrong, which I’m not sure ANY OF US are in a position to actually know.

This is why you hire the best lawyers for the charges leveled, as opposed to creating 5700+ pages of internet conjecture as evidence of being squeaky clean!

Fingers crossed this all goes away LEGALLY, but we all know the damage done to City’s reputation isn’t going away anytime soon, if ever, regardless of the outcome. The “history” of the last decade plus has been written by tribal foes and no amount of legal victories are going to change that for those tribes!

 

[Prophet of Doom]

Santi's magic hat. Santi corzola, it’s a thing with Arsenal fans. Date of creation was April12th or something which coincided with an instragram or threads account created on the same date with the same sort of name, cant remember, I even checked the profile icon but not used anywhere else except available on Shutterstock, then I got bored because at the end of the day its an Arse fan who is very bitter at losing.

Good point and may just be a coincidence with my Saints observation.

But an account set up focusing solely on 115 appealing to bitter Arsenal fans - yet hardly following any Arsenal accounts ?? Then renaming a few weeks later after getting traction on multiple posts based on info doing the rounds for years ?

Could be some random I suppose but does seem weird the whole set up.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Good point and may just be a coincidence with my Saints observation.

But an account set up focusing solely on 115 appealing to bitter Arsenal fans - yet hardly following any Arsenal accounts ?? Then renaming a few weeks later after getting traction on multiple posts based on info doing the rounds for years ?

Could be some random I suppose but does seem weird the whole set up.

Someone who can write in a structured way with estimated reading times, if what this person outlines is so earth shattering why don’t they want to put their actual name on it and why would you put it out for free if you could monetise it?

 

[petrusha]

Just to finish off trying to point out the agenda based bias throughout Magic Twat's thread:

His view is that being found guilty of the non co-operation claims only (I don't consider them to be charges) should result in the club being relegated.

It's just the usual bollocks dressed up in legal language but loads of it to give it 'gravitas'.

The other day on X, @projectriver was drawn into a debate with this Manic Twat character in which the latter was pursuing a bullshit argument about the CAS panel having a conflict of interest. Stefan suggested that the guy was neither an English nor a Swiss lawyer and lacked sufficient experience to assess the issue properly.

Based on the guy's X posts, I agree, as, to judge from what I've seen, he lacks the analytical skills I'd expect from even a lawyer of well below average ability. That said, I haven't yet managed to hold my nose and wade through his latest tirade of sesquipedalian intellectual dishonesty.

Today was a working day for me. I may give it a quick scan in the morning, though I'm fucked if I'm devoting 90 minutes to some dreary screed composed in the utmost bad faith.

 

[Invisible Man's Bandage]

The only reason I saw the Magic Hat thread was when I noticed it on @projectriver X account. He seemed to give it a kind of 'well done' but obviously biased response. My question to him now would be what does he think of it after maybe fully reading it? Statements such as we will be 'crushed' and are 'totally fucked' are really unprofessional and clearly showing the real message behind the veneer of legalistic bluster.

Could it be Nick Harris in your view?

 

[slbsn]

The only reason I saw the Magic Hat thread was when I noticed it on @projectriver X account. He seemed to give it a kind of 'well done' but obviously biased response. My question to him now would be what does he think of it after maybe fully reading it? Statements such as we will be 'crushed' and are 'totally fucked' are really unprofessional and clearly showing the real message behind the veneer of legalistic bluster.

Could it be Nick Harris in your view?

The guy has put a lot of work in. I got asked about it and I don't want any lack of response to be a suggestion it has lots of great points.

I think he genuinely does believe City are fcked. But so what? I read enough to know a lot of it was sound reading of the emails presented - much of that reading wouldn't be disputed by City. The emails say what the emails say. But I am not spending the time going through 25 long posts and responding line by line. The fundamental misunderstanding is how these trials work, the documents that will likely be available (lots), the importance of witness evidence, the submissions of the defence barristers etc.

It is not Nick Harris. Most likely a young American lawyer or law student.

 

[Stoned Rose]

C.A.S. verdict. Read it.

And “sama” is only used when addressing others; never about yourself.

Does it mean “Rag”?

 

[nmc]

The ones I saw about the funding are definitely not new.
So coming from a deceitful starting point.
You do have to wonder why someone would write deceitfully at such length .Could be clicks or else somebody is making it worth his while.

Your last line resonates. There’s an orchestrated dirty tricks campaign and someone is persistently stoking this up.

 

[Stoned Rose]

A quick word of advice. Don't get bogged down in all the detail that is suddenly appearing from suspect sources, even if it reliably reconstitutes what is publicly available.

No-one knows what the detail means if they don't know what the counter-evidence is. And we have been here before with UEFA. They only had the publicly available "evidence" and it all looked pretty incriminating until it suddenly didn't.

Bottom line. They still won't have access to any substantial evidence that proves the most serious charges and, by that, I mean Etihad. Without that, the true and fair issues go away and so do the FFP issues. Nothing substantial left after that.

Hi mate not been on for a few days.

Has something new popped up? Seems to be a huge number of posts since I was last on?