It would be lovely to see those communications but, unfortunately, they'll be subject to legal privilege and won't be disclosed.
Alternatively it could lead to the IC undertaking a more detailed scrutiny of the wording of the rules we're alleged to have broken to avoid looking foolish on appeal.Am I being too cynical that we're going to be found guilty on all charges to cause maximum 'bad press' and drag our name through the mud as much as possible only for the appeal mob to chuck everything out?
They'd not get the result they wanted but would cause maximum disruption.
That’s a bummer. Without disclosing the whole emails would the general jist of it be included in the summary.
I, we and the club would much prefer that scenario.Alternatively it could lead to the IC undertaking a more detailed scrutiny of the wording of the rules we're alleged to have broken to avoid looking foolish on appeal.
Our detractors described UEFA having no evidence as "a technicality".Unless I'm missing something the biggest take away is that the independent commission aren't afraid to side against the PL. Which is hopefully a good sign.
As for the approach LCFC used to defeat the charges, it would still be described as City getting off on a technicality again
They should have just abided by the decision. That’s the whole point of an independent panel. Why is the PL leadership at war with its own members? It is supposed to be a neutral administrator. The process has been corrupted.tbf, they could hardly say they welcomed the determination and were expecting it!
everything is a technicality, i mean technically masters is head of the pl despite all evidence pointing to the contrary, technically the rags are a football team despite overwhelming evidence suggesting that they are an overbloated marketing company leeching off the stupid.Our detractors described UEFA having no evidence as "a technicality".