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
Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge. Doesn’t make sense to me.
Last edited:
Mid Wales blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,758
You forgot the “R” between the O and G, and when are the invitations sent out?Did you mean ….
Best ANALogy?
how do you know we didnt, how do you know we didnt give them exactly what they asked for and it still wasnt enough, this has been a witch hunt from day one specifically designed to smear the club because they couldnt beat us on the pitch, it wouldnt have mattered what we gave them it would never have been enough.Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and at we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge.
how do you know we didnt, how do you know we didnt give them exactly what they asked for and it still wasnt enough, this has been a witch hunt from day one specifically designed to smear the club because they couldnt beat us on the pitch, it wouldnt have mattered what we gave them it would never have been enough.
I don’t and they’re fair comments. Ive just read on here multiple times (by several posters) that we would never provide them with commercially sensitive material.
Newman Noggs
Well-Known Member
Principle and precedent. You never, ever voluntarily give an investigation more information than they are entitled to.Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and at we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge.
You give them some, they ask for more, you give them that, they want more still. In essence, you help them fishing for information. And the next time, you refuse. "You gave us information voluntarily before, what have you got to hide now ?". And so it goes on. Plus, this whole charade is an exercise in bad faith and should be obstructed at every available opportunity as a matter of principle.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,720
UEFA had none, per CAS.The idea the PL have no evidence seems unlikely.
dadnlad
Well-Known Member
Come on we all know CAS is a joke and rushed hearing just to get home :)UEFA had none, per CAS.
Can someone enlighten me on this point please. If we have irrefutable evidence (and I am confident we do), why did we just not present that during the investigation? Yes it may be commercially sensitive material, and the premier league were probably overreaching their jurisdiction, but the immense damage this has done the club and we could end up paying millions for some non-cooperation bull shit charge. Doesn’t make sense to me.
Because it's probably not as black and white as the PL asking a specific question and us providing the specific details of the transactions. They will potentially have asked for all transactions over a period of time, or relating to a specific supplier and that would involve providing information that is potentially irrelevant to the investigation (or the PL's mind, provide a chance to find something else to investigate).
we would never provide them with information they are not entitled to and not entitled to ask for anyway and nor should we, the pl have massively overstepped their remit of what information they feel like they should be allowed to access dont forget they genuinely believed they were entitled to peruse the books of etihad airways etc and that just wasnt going to happen when emirates sponsor arsenalI don’t and they’re fair comments. Ive just read on here multiple times (by several posters) that we would never provide them with commercially sensitive material.