PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Man_City_Loyal]

PP can get to F*** ha

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

Masters baiting us.

what's he said?

 

[Keeper!]

 

[BlueRockape]

The Premier League rules are made up because they let the scum red tops do whatever they want. Once they have had enough of City they can do and say whatever they like,

In the PSR court case, Clearly City won because Masters came out and said it does not work for the scum red tops or other teams in the League, So what happens now is the scum red tops will get away with anything they want and be allowed to spend £Billions and put in into the club debts.

Mark my words here, Once they get rid of City with the 115 charges United will be winning titles again.
After this new rule change and Manchester City is out of the way and in an impossible situation of championship football and a with transfer window embargo its over for at least 5 years.

As you probably have we have suffered for a lot longer period than five years.
I say bring it on the rise back to the top will be euphoric.


That's IF

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I understand it and it could be the outcome, but it seems it would be a fudge that satisfies nobody.

When there isn't enough evidence to find someone guilty they are usually found innocent of charges. That's the way it normally works??

 

[GortonBlue62]

It's not the Kangaroo we all should be worrying about and the independent panel, it's in our own defence that allowed Uefa to find us not guilty but accept a fine of £10million for not corresponding with them,

Now if the same happens and the panel finds us not guilty of any wrongdoings, BUT they say for not corresponding with them on time your punishment is relegation, We don't have a right to appeal and a guilty verdict in the media is good enough for them to be right and cheats

The €30 million non-cooperation fine imposed by UEFA was reduced to €10 million by CAS.

Surely any guilty verdict on non-cooperation imposed by the PL, would not be judged to have given City an on-field advantage, and would therefore attract a fine rather than a points deduction?

 

[Keeper!]

In the words of Charles Mackay

You have no enemies, you say? Alas, my friend, the boast is poor. He who has mingled in the fray of duty that the brave endure, must have made foes. If you have none, small is the work that you have done. You’ve hit no traitor on the hip. You’ve dashed no cup from perjured lip. You’ve never turned the wrong to right. You’ve been a coward in the fight.

The day we have no enemies is the day we become an irrelevant club.

The more the better, the more spite, hatred and pure envy, the more success we have.... AVE IT!!!

 

[Keeper!]

Could never get the popularity of Jeff Stelling, he always came across as having a smugness combined with too few braincells to back it up.

Even more so with his gig on talksport, he as you quite rightly say is a smug bastard and a bitter one.

 

[blueparrot]

When there isn't enough evidence to find someone guilty they are usually found innocent of charges. That's the way it normally works??

Should be, but a fudge wouldn't surprise me.More like a not proven vedict.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

I thought this was gonna be shite and lazy but they've absolutely done us there.