gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Yes, far better! As I said earlier, the cunts don’t know what they’re doing.
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
spacecadet
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure Blackburn have already been on a longish transfer ban a few year ago.Watch out Blackburn….
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 9,755
Yes, far better! As I said earlier, the cunts don’t know what they’re doing.
I reckon they decided if it worked for Ceferin then they would follow suit. I’d be making a point at the next shareholders meeting that it was a poorly worded statement.
TheThirdDeano
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 8,720
Hope Leicester chase them up about the ‘surprise and disappointment’ comment!
What a bunch of cunts! It reeks of poor sportsmanship and childishness, and shows you they operate in bad faith to their competitors that aren’t part of the cartel
What a bunch of cunts! It reeks of poor sportsmanship and childishness, and shows you they operate in bad faith to their competitors that aren’t part of the cartel
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 9,755
Another question for our legal people.
If the APT rules are found to be illegal and have to be changed, but 7 clubs vote against changing them (as they chose to do when the PL tried to close Chelsea's hotel loophole). What happens then? I am thinking this "it's the clubs that vote for the rules" is just convenient nonsense to allow the powerful clubs to get what they want to the detriment of the league.
Surely the role of the CEO & board is there to ensure the legality of the rules & those illegal rules cannot be adopted no matter how many want them. ( oops it was aimed at legal peeps )
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 10,924
Surely the role of the CEO & board is there to ensure the legality of the rules & those illegal rules cannot be adopted no matter how many want them. ( oops it was aimed at legal peeps )
But they have been adopted. So they would have to be changed. This happens by a vote in general meeting. What happens if the PL doesn't get enough votes from the clubs to change?
Just a theoretical question out of interest. To see if seven clubs could cause a lot of nuisance if they aren't listened to .....
The PL have a top KC.Outgun them? Masters is in charge of the pl and khaldoon is in charge of city, they bought a blunt stick to a nuclear war
Stefan was, I think, referring to the original rule on managers remuneration in which it is explicitly stated that the managers contract is the evidence needed. Well we submitted Mancini’s contract. His arrangement with Mansour is not part of his relationship with City. End of.Yep. On the face of it, it shouldn’t have any relevance to our case but if they can’t get it right in a seemingly straightforward case like Leicester’s, what chance in a complicated one like ours?
Given the wide-ranging nature of the allegations against us, you’d have to think that City have multiple avenues of attack lined up. It’s also left me wondering if Everton and Forest have an angle to get their punishments thrown out too.
Regulator will not have that power.This has to be one of the PL's most inept and stupid decisions, and christ knows they have made so many in their attempts to appease the redshirt cartel.
Firing Masters has to be the first and easiest of the jobs for an Independent Regulator.
Atoma est……it’s actually comical they are asking him to comment on this. They might as well ask him to explain quantum mechanics in Latin.