Will there be opening statements?
"We're here because some clubs didn't want competition, fair or otherwise, and wanted to maintain a cartel. These rules were designed to affect competitors, new entrants to the limited number of clubs with money, or debt, and not to minimise risk of clubs getting into financial difficulties. That being said, we maintain that we have not broken any of these anti-competitive rules. The club has arranged its affairs accordingly, like other clubs claiming offsetting costs such as on new stadiums that never were built, hotels that aren't part of the footballing business, and most of United's offshore jiggery-pokery.
Directors of rival clubs hold administrative posts in the regulatory bodies. Two rival clubs were consulted about the most senior job in the Premier League. Rival clubs have prompted this present situation, and we believe that part of the aim is to damage City's reputation even if, nay when, you establish there is no case to answer.
Should you quickly realise the veracity of this statement, we hope you would quickly advise the Premier League that it would be folly to keep this inquiry going in the vain hope of finding some minor infringement of the rules. We also hope that you will understand that any 'lack of cooperation' would be understandable given that no defendant should be obliged to cooperate with a biased and compromised prosecutor."
