PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Newman Noggs said:
No, the time for talk is after we are found not to have breached their rules. You've seen how Pep's anodyne comments are twisted and scrutinised by a hostile media.

If we started putting any of our case into the open, it would be analysed and shredded and twisted by every rabid looney out there (Harris, Roan, Stone, I'm looking at you!) and just add to their infantile sense of self-importance. There is, literally, nothing that we can say before the judgement that will stop them. If the charges are disproven, the club, and Khaldoon in particular, will have plenty to say. As will the rest of us. Roll on that day.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and besides I think the little devil in Pep likes it with the media.
 
IronsideKozuch said:
Would love to hear our legal team arguments on the matter, because surely they have some (I admire Pannick for years and read two of his books), but I just think we make grave mistake by not addressing publicly the merits of charges.

Where is Khaldoon, legal, accounting team? Why you leave Pep alone with this shit?

You do not spoil Your standpoint or make a mess or fuss to avoide offending anybody, therein obviously the panel. But also as a lawyer as a ultima ratio you should publicly defend Your Client if hes publicly under fire and total attack. You defend publicly with class and dignity. And to address the claims even at overall level.

Charges have been made public and I dont recall any subsantial, official line of our defense ffs.

We can say in general and ambiguous terms, that they took emails out of context for instance about need of payment by a sponsor because its been in accordance to contract and performance payments, which were happening at regular basis etc. I mean, short summary of whatever we put forward in the pleadings.

Publicity, media attacks you. PL made charges public. You can and should defend yourself appropriately, including to drive the public narrative in Your favour. I just would love to learn the reasoning from our legal team/PR strategists. They are exceptional experts so they would probably come up with something convincing but for now Im angry;)
Click to expand...
Er…we mounted that defence when UEFA charged us. Soriano and Khaldoon said quite a lot about ‘out of context, stolen emails’ When Soriano said we would be cleared once we were in front of an independent court, the Times and the Mail called him arrogant.
 
Newman Noggs said:
No, the time for talk is after we are found not to have breached their rules. You've seen how Pep's anodyne comments are twisted and scrutinised by a hostile media.

If we started putting any of our case into the open, it would be analysed and shredded and twisted by every rabid looney out there (Harris, Roan, Stone, I'm looking at you!) and just add to their infantile sense of self-importance. There is, literally, nothing that we can say before the judgement that will stop them. If the charges are disproven, the club, and Khaldoon in particular, will have plenty to say. As will the rest of us. Roll on that day.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but in reality it looks a bit different. You need to be ready for every scenario. Including loosing. Does not mean it would be true or fair, but we should agree, that sentences are not always right. As simple as that. Whats then? You have zero preventive narrative out there. And zero credibility to create one then. Super risky. Mistake imo.
 
Am I right in thinking the date has been moved forward and time it will take reduced a lot so could mean pre hearing stuff has proven or disproven stuff without a doubt
 
Hamann Pineapple said:
When found innocent, we won't ask for monetary compensation, we will ask for a grovelling apology and a frank explanation of why the charges were influenced by poorly run clubs.
Click to expand...
As Cascarino just said on TS, if we are found not guilty then heads will roll in the PL.
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
As Cascarino just said on TS, if we are found not guilty then heads will roll in the PL.
Click to expand...
I hope so , reminds me a bit of this
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Oldham council boss sacked over 'flawed' Vance Miller case settles industrial tribunal over sacking

A trading standards chief sacked in the wake of a bungled prosecution of kitchens boss Vance Miller has settled out of court with town hall chiefs. Tony Allen was dismissed after Oldham council’s failed prosecution of the controversial businessman spectacularly collapsed at Manchester Crown Court.
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

There are some great bits of Vance Miller on youtube, I quite liked him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.