PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

What a strange take from a United fan....

Shanghai Red​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Oct 14, 2023Messages 24
Out here in The Emirates, the word for a while is that they are clear apart from some vague ‘non co-operation’ charge and that the delay is down to a negotiation between them and the PL regarding how much compensation they are due as a result of their APT case win. There is also word that the PL are desperately trying to head off more litigation between City and some of the ‘Big Six’ because City are pursuing damages against them (I guess that includes us). The last thing the PL want is all out civil war between City/Newcastle and the USA owned clubs. I doubt that I could hate them more than I do, but if this is the outcome, I suspect I’ll try to.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
What a strange take from a United fan....

Shanghai Red​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Oct 14, 2023Messages 24
Out here in The Emirates, the word for a while is that they are clear apart from some vague ‘non co-operation’ charge and that the delay is down to a negotiation between them and the PL regarding how much compensation they are due as a result of their APT case win. There is also word that the PL are desperately trying to head off more litigation between City and some of the ‘Big Six’ because City are pursuing damages against them (I guess that includes us). The last thing the PL want is all out civil war between City/Newcastle and the USA owned clubs. I doubt that I could hate them more than I do, but if this is the outcome, I suspect I’ll try to.
Click to expand...
I always chuckle at how one or two conversations can suddenly represent a whole region. “Out here in the Emirates” my arse.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
What a strange take from a United fan....

Shanghai Red​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Oct 14, 2023Messages 24
Out here in The Emirates, the word for a while is that they are clear apart from some vague ‘non co-operation’ charge and that the delay is down to a negotiation between them and the PL regarding how much compensation they are due as a result of their APT case win. There is also word that the PL are desperately trying to head off more litigation between City and some of the ‘Big Six’ because City are pursuing damages against them (I guess that includes us). The last thing the PL want is all out civil war between City/Newcastle and the USA owned clubs. I doubt that I could hate them more than I do, but if this is the outcome, I suspect I’ll try to.
Click to expand...

I like that so I choose to believe it :)
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
What a strange take from a United fan....

Shanghai Red​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Oct 14, 2023Messages 24
Out here in The Emirates, the word for a while is that they are clear apart from some vague ‘non co-operation’ charge and that the delay is down to a negotiation between them and the PL regarding how much compensation they are due as a result of their APT case win. There is also word that the PL are desperately trying to head off more litigation between City and some of the ‘Big Six’ because City are pursuing damages against them (I guess that includes us). The last thing the PL want is all out civil war between City/Newcastle and the USA owned clubs. I doubt that I could hate them more than I do, but if this is the outcome, I suspect I’ll try to.
Click to expand...
People can keep pressing this nonsense but it simply is not true
 
The annoucement of the Etihad renewal is still expected, the timing of it could be very interesting and maybe that suggestion of APT fallout is what's delaying the big reveal
 
calumdown said:
it is modern, yeah, that's precisely why i posted it.

in terms of what you are saying above,
i completely agree,
and i'd like to maybe talk a little about the parallels of it with punk.

alas, time is against me.
i've been invited to go to the sultan's palace today.
and fuck knows why but i've agreed to go there by camel.
there's a perfectly decent small road on which a taxi would take 20mins,
but we're going the long way round over the dunes,
giving it the full lawrence of arabia bollox,
and i have a feeling one of us is going to regret it.

in the meantime,
may i ask you about your distinction between reggae and dancehall?

for me the term reggae is an umbrella that covers all the genres.
dancehall, roots, dub, lovers, rocksteady, et cetara.
i'm interested to know your reasoning.







for now...

HEw6tW.gif
Click to expand...
For me, ‘proper’ reggae is the 60s and 70s (and some early 80s) stuff with that slower, happier, sweeter sound and vibe. Stories about love, nature, spirituality, struggles and of course, the herb. A lot of it sounds live on the record, that innocent rawness to the sound, you can “feel” the music.

Dancehall originated from that vibe but as recording techniques and technology improved, the sound switched to a faster tempo, more “produced” sounding, and much of it not even recorded from real instruments. The topics changed, it became a lot more sexualised, derogatory towards women, glorifying violence and guns, and in some cases, a switch from the herb to cocaine being the underlying inspiration. The vocal style changed from that really rootsy crooning and harmonies to more harshly delivered, “loud talking” (not quite rapping but not far off), but not much actual singing. A more aggressive and macho vibe.

I enjoy both but I much prefer reggae. I can easily do a full day of reggae when I’m working from home. Dancehall, I have to dip in and out and have breaks.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
What a strange take from a United fan....

Shanghai Red​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Oct 14, 2023Messages 24
Out here in The Emirates, the word for a while is that they are clear apart from some vague ‘non co-operation’ charge and that the delay is down to a negotiation between them and the PL regarding how much compensation they are due as a result of their APT case win. There is also word that the PL are desperately trying to head off more litigation between City and some of the ‘Big Six’ because City are pursuing damages against them (I guess that includes us). The last thing the PL want is all out civil war between City/Newcastle and the USA owned clubs. I doubt that I could hate them more than I do, but if this is the outcome, I suspect I’ll try to.
Click to expand...
Shanghai Bullshit more like.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I would say their penultimate sentence is true. Hard to see how it wouldn’t be.
Click to expand...
Clearly I was talking about the idea there is ongoing settlement discussions/City suing Big 6. But as it happens I don't think the PL Board are focussed on "Civil War" or that there is a general US v City/Newcastle animosity. It is far more nuanced than that.
 
slbsn said:
Clearly I was talking about the idea there is ongoing settlement discussions. But as it happens I don't think the PL Board are focussed that much about "Civil War" or that there is a general US v City/Newcastle animosity. It is far more nuanced than that.
Click to expand...
Two things. Firstly I didn’t suggest you were talking about that particular sentence. It would obvious you weren’t to anyone with the most rudimentary English comprehension skills.

Secondly, whether they are focused on it or not, I assume you agree that it is something they would want to avoid at all costs, which is the point Shanghai Red made. On what planet would that statement be incorrect?
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You are absolutely correct on the two highlighted parts. The **** knows exactly what he’s doing.

The fact he’s conflated two separate proceedings, in two entirely extraneous legal jurisdictions, and speculated about the outcome of the first in order to make an inference about the second, operating as nothing short of a non-sequitur, shows how desperate the **** is to manage the narrative on an outcome he plainly knows is coming.

It’s funny when the **** was previously pontificating in terms of ‘no smoke without fire’ I don’t recall him speculating about the government of the day wading in and saving the day for City. Strange how he’s crowbarring it in at this stage.

Thing about Delaney, is that he plainly thinks he’s a lot smarter then he is, but his conspicuous inability to think analytically about the arguments he is formulating is nothing short of pitiful.

Braindead fucking ****.
Click to expand...
Top post.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You are absolutely correct on the two highlighted parts. The **** knows exactly what he’s doing.

The fact he’s conflated two separate proceedings, in two entirely extraneous legal jurisdictions, and speculated about the outcome of the first in order to make an inference about the second, operating as nothing short of a non-sequitur, shows how desperate the **** is to manage the narrative on an outcome he plainly knows is coming.

It’s funny when the **** was previously pontificating in terms of ‘no smoke without fire’ I don’t recall him speculating about the government of the day wading in and saving the day for City. Strange how he’s crowbarring it in at this stage.

Thing about Delaney, is that he plainly thinks he’s a lot smarter then he is, but his conspicuous inability to think analytically about the arguments he is formulating is nothing short of pitiful.

Braindead fucking ****.
Click to expand...


Great deployments of the term ****, outstanding effort.
 
CC1 said:
You’re too transparent. But I’m not getting into a debate with you. It’s all been said now & is OLD news
Click to expand...
Yes since my post I see around 30 people asked you the same thing and even slbn told you to chill out.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Two things. Firstly I didn’t suggest you were talking about that particular sentence. It would obvious you weren’t to anyone with the most rudimentary English comprehension skills.

Secondly, whether they are focused on it or not, I assume you agree that it is something they would want to avoid at all costs, which is the point Shanghai Red made. On what planet would that statement be incorrect?
Click to expand...
I think they have shown that they are not too bothered about the consequences of certain actions whether they cause Civil War or not. This includes APT in itself, the decision to pursue the Amended APT changes, the decision to process further changes against City, Villa and Newcastle's protests after the initial decision and the manner in which 115 was pursued. I would say their approach is to ignore the knock off effects of their decisions and quite one dimensional. So no, I don't agree they will want to avoid Civil War "at all costs". I think they have a view they will simply deal with any consequences that flow from their core decisions.

That said none of this is what I am describing as nonsense in these constant posts about the decision being out and lots of stuff happening in the background. We even have a contemporaneous statement from Pannick and yet people persist with this.
 
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