PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Oystercatcher28]

Coming up: Tedious months of off the field distraction

 

[Bald fraud]

What a fucking mess!

 

[why me? Blue Manchester]

What a fucking mess!

Agreed

 

[spiny]

The question is:

Is he really that pitifully informed/delusional/incompetant for something he spends so much time and effort convincing everyone he's an expert on?

Or

Is it more that he thinks most people are idiots and will believe anything he tells them, if he sells it hard enough?

Neither. Many people will only read what they want to hear. Just part of the smear campaign against City. Clear and organised.

 

[Rochdale Blue]

If it makes you feel any better, the four independent panels that considered the Everton and Forest cases (and their appeals) were all chaired by judges or KCs and the remaining members were all judges, KCs, CAs and lawyers of various ilks.

There shouldn't really be any cause for concern on grounds of independence or undue influence.

The PL will be feeling the pressure you mentioned, though, hence Masters saying nothing at all very loudly this week. But rest easy. The case will be decided on the evidence presented by the PL and the counter-evidence presented by the club. My money, for many reasons on the most substantive allegations, is on the club.

However, to answer your question specifically: the panel's decision can be appealed to another three-man panel chosen by Rosen, then there are limited opportunities to take the case to arbitration and, finally, very limited opportunities (to the extent that it would be virtually impossible*) to go to a "real court". Hope that helps.


* On the other hand, a HHGTTG quote: "Then, one day, a student who had been left to sweep up after a particularly unsuccessful party found himself reasoning in this way: "If such a machine is a virtual impossibility, it must have finite improbability. So all I have to do, in order to make one, is to work out how exactly improbable it is, feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give it a fresh cup of really hot tea... and turn it on!""

In this case, the finite improbability generator is a highly skilled and very expensive team of legal advisors who are grappling with the very problem of appeals, I would imagine. The tea is probably the same.

:)

I suppose we are the jammy dodgers.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Don't give the **** oxygen FFS.

It is obviously someone who is mentally ill. We have all seen the emails and the CAS statement.

 

[mancboy]

Agree with you on keeping up to date with what is on Twitter, even if it may negatively affect the more sensitive souls on here.

But it's a conundrum isn't it? These guys (and you know who I mean) are clearly intelligent. They can write well, but can't seem to get it right. Just right enough to convince people less intelligent than they are that what they want to believe is the truth. It's pretty obvious they have found a way to generate income from this nonsense and I doubt they believe any of it themselves.

I will be so relieved when FFP/PSR is finished in it's controversial form and all these "experts" disappear never to be seen again.

said it before and i will say it again social media is a vacuum where the person who shouts the loudest and tells people what they want to hear is lauded, it is the misinformed preaching to the brainless never has a place so suited the term in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

 

[WRicko]

No.

Sounds like a stitch up

 

[mancboy]

Does anyone know who this guy is

ah i see nick harris is off his meds again

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If it makes you feel any better, the four independent panels that considered the Everton and Forest cases (and their appeals) were all chaired by judges or KCs and the remaining members were all judges, KCs, CAs and lawyers of various ilks.

There shouldn't really be any cause for concern on grounds of independence or undue influence.

The PL will be feeling the pressure you mentioned, though, hence Masters saying nothing at all very loudly this week. But rest easy. The case will be decided on the evidence presented by the PL and the counter-evidence presented by the club. My money, for many reasons on the most substantive allegations, is on the club.

However, to answer your question specifically: the panel's decision can be appealed to another three-man panel chosen by Rosen, then there are limited opportunities to take the case to arbitration and, finally, very limited opportunities (to the extent that it would be virtually impossible*) to go to a "real court". Hope that helps.


* On the other hand, a HHGTTG quote: "Then, one day, a student who had been left to sweep up after a particularly unsuccessful party found himself reasoning in this way: "If such a machine is a virtual impossibility, it must have finite improbability. So all I have to do, in order to make one, is to work out how exactly improbable it is, feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give it a fresh cup of really hot tea... and turn it on!""

In this case, the finite improbability generator is a highly skilled and very expensive team of legal advisors who are grappling with the very problem of appeals, I would imagine. The tea is probably the same.

:)

Masters has refused to comment on the case at all till this week. I think he knows he is losing and his claim that; “It’s up to the panel. We just enforce the rules,” is damage limitation.