Bald fraud
Well-Known Member
Well if there is any get ready for the uproar. Because no way will the fuckin hypocrites let us use them!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,321
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
What if the texts reveal that the rules were brought in specifically to throttle City's succcess?This is all sidebar stuff. The crux of the matter remains the legality of the APT rules not what someone may have said in a text or email...
LeonardoDaVnci
Well-Known Member
Finding evidence on Parry and Gill.
Thats not going to be too hard, its in the public domain. Parry actually said in a televised interview that historically successful clubs (coded language for dips/rags/tarqs) had earned the "right" to be more influential when the PL implemented new regulations.
Gill made a recorded speech (for a long time on You Tube) where he attacked City and PSG using coded language "state controlled clubs". He actually said these clubs were a serious threat to the game and had to be stopped, just like a classic Tebas rant.
Thats not going to be too hard, its in the public domain. Parry actually said in a televised interview that historically successful clubs (coded language for dips/rags/tarqs) had earned the "right" to be more influential when the PL implemented new regulations.
Gill made a recorded speech (for a long time on You Tube) where he attacked City and PSG using coded language "state controlled clubs". He actually said these clubs were a serious threat to the game and had to be stopped, just like a classic Tebas rant.
Last edited:
That would be a tremendous bonus. But what if they were brought in to stop City but at the same time while being unethical are deemed legal? There are a few ways this can go. I know what we'd like to see and hopefully we do...What if the texts reveal that the rules were brought in specifically to throttle City's succcess?
Toranaga sama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 196
This leak can only come from 1 of the 3 parties involved in this legal dispute.
IC: I don't think they are the source of this leak. It's highly unlikely to me and I wonder what they would gain from this leaking.
City: We have seen previously that City doesn't have the habit of leaking something to the press when there is an investigation going on. We saw the same pattern from City with UEFA, CAS and PL. And if we were to leak something then surely we would hand our news material to someone else, sure not to Matt Lawton (the massive ****) from The Times who with his buddy Matthew Syed and Martyn Ziegler consistently slagging us. And if we decide to leak something with a high magnitude then the obvious choice would be Martin Samuel or Simon Mullock. That's why I just don't see City leaking this.
Premier League: The usual suspect. I am certain that they are the source. As we have already seen in the past week from Matt Lawton's reports on our legal action against PL. Either PL is a direct source or PL made the arrangement via 3rd party like Arsenal. Either way, they are the source.
Now the question is what PL can achieve from this leak and what was their motivation...? I don't have the answer for that. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
IC: I don't think they are the source of this leak. It's highly unlikely to me and I wonder what they would gain from this leaking.
City: We have seen previously that City doesn't have the habit of leaking something to the press when there is an investigation going on. We saw the same pattern from City with UEFA, CAS and PL. And if we were to leak something then surely we would hand our news material to someone else, sure not to Matt Lawton (the massive ****) from The Times who with his buddy Matthew Syed and Martyn Ziegler consistently slagging us. And if we decide to leak something with a high magnitude then the obvious choice would be Martin Samuel or Simon Mullock. That's why I just don't see City leaking this.
Premier League: The usual suspect. I am certain that they are the source. As we have already seen in the past week from Matt Lawton's reports on our legal action against PL. Either PL is a direct source or PL made the arrangement via 3rd party like Arsenal. Either way, they are the source.
Now the question is what PL can achieve from this leak and what was their motivation...? I don't have the answer for that. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
A bit like Vennells, we had it in the aerospace business. Putting stooges in power.Masters would be out of his depth if he was a lifeguard at a paddling pool
journolud
Well-Known Member
“Full” disclosure might confirm our beliefs but I don’t think absence of evidence necessarily negates them
One of our beliefs is that the red top cartel have cajoled the PL to behave in a particular way. Disclosing all and any communication should confirm or deny the validity of this.
It’s important, us blues, accept the outcome of this disclosure no matter if it confirms or denies our beliefs. We will be asking everyone else to do the same when we are found innocent.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
Lol dont shout that too loudly it could get real political real fast ;)
If we really wanted to use it, we could even tell you who shot JFK ;)
LeonardoDaVnci
Well-Known Member
Maybe they have shares in a Law practice because you can bet your life if that leak isn't resolved to City's satisfaction it will be the next case going to arbitration. In fact when the Tribunal starts tomorrow it will be issue No 1 ie that City's submissions were leaked in their entirety to the The Times. If the court has the power City may demand The Times reveal the source, ie the wife of the Times Chief Sports writer who is an arse executive.This leak can only come from 1 of the 3 parties involved in this legal dispute.
IC: I don't think they are the source of this leak. It's highly unlikely to me and I wonder what they would gain from this leaking.
City: We have seen previously that City doesn't have the habit of leaking something to the press when there is an investigation going on. We saw the same pattern from City with UEFA, CAS and PL. And if we were to leak something then surely we would hand our news material to someone else, sure not to Matt Lawton (the massive ****) from The Times who with his buddy Matthew Syed and Martyn Ziegler consistently slagging us. And if we decide to leak something with a high magnitude then the obvious choice would be Martin Samuel or Simon Mullock. That's why I just don't see City leaking this.
Premier League: The usual suspect. I am certain that they are the source. As we have already seen in the past week from Matt Lawton's reports on our legal action against PL. Either PL is a direct source or PL made the arrangement via 3rd party like Arsenal. Either way, they are the source.
Now the question is what PL can achieve from this leak and what was their motivation...? I don't have the answer for that. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
For an MSM entity like the The Times to publicly declare its in possession of legal submissions and then publish extracts before the associated case is even heard, that is piss poor. Have they employed the Post Office lawyers ?
Last edited: