PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

calumdown said:
twas i,
so i'll reply...


i honestly wasn't calling you out, mate.
i don't for one second doubt you sent the email and that you got a reply from his blackstone email address.

but in the cold light of day and with hindsight,
let's look at the facts of who lord pannick is...

the absolute apex of the uk legal profession.
band 1 leading silk.
regarded as one of the greatest advocates ever.
top of the list in numbers for appearances in the highest courts.
one of the country's most powerful and influential people in terms of law.
incredibly high-profile clients in genuinely landmark cases.


i have absolutely no idea what you do or who you are,
maybe you too are of high standing,
but my guess, and it is only a guess, is that you are not right up there,
(and if you are i will humbly apologise)
so unless you sent your email from another chamber of renown i still doubt it went ping on pannick's phone.



now i'm going to sound like a bit of a tosser.
everyone who knows me tells me i am one, so it's no big deal,
but could you explain exactly how you could tell the difference between an email from his lordship and one of his clerks?

what does "it doesn't sound as though" actually mean?
how might it sound differently if it were from a clerk and not him?

bearing in mind that his clerks, although not legal professionals, will have exhaustive, practical knowledge of such things and will know the details of all the cases in depth.
Click to expand...
Maybe the fact he signed it off as himself?
 
halfcenturyup said:
Not if it was being appealed and the appeal maybe taken to arbitration. The Chelsea FA case wasn't published until the appeal was finished as we all know.
Click to expand...
If there has been an appeal, then the club must know the outcome of the original hearing, which were told they don't. So that theory may not be that sound. Plus even if there had been an appeal, we'd still know by now. As I understand it, an appeal does not re-examine all the evidence, so it wouldn't take as long as the original 10 week hearing.

I'd say the only things we can be reasonably sure of is that:
(a) the panel has reached a decision, and probably did so not too long after the end of the hearing,
(b) that decision has not yet been published.
 
FanchesterCity said:
So...
What if the judgment reflects badly on both parties? It isn't an option many have contemplated and perhaps with good reason, but what if that were the case?

Imagine a scenario where City were adjudged to have circumvented rules. Either deliberately or in good faith but still technical breaches.... BUT the PL were also found to have targeted City or not applied similar scrutiny to others...

That would be a 'can of worms' scenario where both parties might prefer to keep matters quiet for as long as possible, if not indefinitely. The repercussions being City found guilty of some of the charges but the PL then forced to apply similar scrutiny to others which would cause mayhem.

Now, before anybody latches onto the City guilt thing... it is merely an illustration of a scenario that hasn't really been discussed - both sides losing.
Click to expand...
That's actually good reasoning tbf.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
If there has been an appeal, then the club must know the outcome of the original hearing, which were told they don't. So that theory may not be that sound. Plus even if there had been an appeal, we'd still know by now. As I understand it, an appeal does not re-examine all the evidence, so it wouldn't take as long as the original 10 week hearing.

I'd say the only things we can be reasonably sure of is that:
(a) the panel has reached a decision, and probably did so not too long after the end of the hearing,
(b) that decision has not yet been published.
Click to expand...
Given that there is a huge amount of interest in this case and both the Premier League and City are probably sick of waiting for the decision, you would have thought that they would have insisted that the panel give a statement explaining the delay and at least an approximate timeline for the outcome.
 
calumdown said:
twas i,
so i'll reply...


i honestly wasn't calling you out, mate.
i don't for one second doubt you sent the email and that you got a reply from his blackstone email address.

but in the cold light of day and with hindsight,
let's look at the facts of who lord pannick is...

the absolute apex of the uk legal profession.
band 1 leading silk.
regarded as one of the greatest advocates ever.
top of the list in numbers for appearances in the highest courts.
one of the country's most powerful and influential people in terms of law.
incredibly high-profile clients in genuinely landmark cases.


i have absolutely no idea what you do or who you are,
maybe you too are of high standing,
but my guess, and it is only a guess, is that you are not right up there,
(and if you are i will humbly apologise)
so unless you sent your email from another chamber of renown i still doubt it went ping on pannick's phone.



now i'm going to sound like a bit of a tosser.
everyone who knows me tells me i am one, so it's no big deal,
but could you explain exactly how you could tell the difference between an email from his lordship and one of his clerks?

what does "it doesn't sound as though" actually mean?
how might it sound differently if it were from a clerk and not him?

bearing in mind that his clerks, although not legal professionals, will have exhaustive, practical knowledge of such things and will know the details of all the cases in depth.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'm absolutely not offended by different opinions. It's natural that this forum elicits a wide range of them.

I think the tone of the replies is consistent with one person replying, rather than from one of a pool of clerks on reply duty. Also, the timing of the replies, which are at various times of day, including the most recent just after 9am on a Saturday. Would the reply team be on duty at this time?

However, I have no knowledge of how any legal chamber works, so my assumptions might be wrong. I am a standard City fan, retired with time on my hands, and not averse to spending it on spurious tasks like this. All messages sent from my Gmail account.
 
Paladin said:
Thanks. I'm absolutely not offended by different opinions. It's natural that this forum elicits a wide range of them.

I think the tone of the replies is consistent with one person replying, rather than from one of a pool of clerks on reply duty. Also, the timing of the replies, which are at various times of day, including the most recent just after 9am on a Saturday. Would the reply team be on duty at this time?

However, I have no knowledge of how any legal chamber works, so my assumptions might be wrong. I am a standard City fan, retired with time on my hands, and not averse to spending it on spurious tasks like this. All messages sent from my Gmail account.
Click to expand...

Whilst you are on a roll, try Richard Masters, he might know rmasters@premierleague.com
 
Paladin said:
Thanks. I'm absolutely not offended by different opinions. It's natural that this forum elicits a wide range of them.

I think the tone of the replies is consistent with one person replying, rather than from one of a pool of clerks on reply duty. Also, the timing of the replies, which are at various times of day, including the most recent just after 9am on a Saturday. Would the reply team be on duty at this time?

However, I have no knowledge of how any legal chamber works, so my assumptions might be wrong. I am a standard City fan, retired with time on my hands, and not averse to spending it on spurious tasks like this. All messages sent from my Gmail account.
Click to expand...

Could you maybe try emailing someone on the other side and see what they say...? :)
 
Paladin said:
Thanks. I'm absolutely not offended by different opinions. It's natural that this forum elicits a wide range of them.

I think the tone of the replies is consistent with one person replying, rather than from one of a pool of clerks on reply duty. Also, the timing of the replies, which are at various times of day, including the most recent just after 9am on a Saturday. Would the reply team be on duty at this time?

However, I have no knowledge of how any legal chamber works, so my assumptions might be wrong. I am a standard City fan, retired with time on my hands, and not averse to spending it on spurious tasks like this. All messages sent from my Gmail account.
Click to expand...
Private secretaries are online more or less 24/7
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
If there has been an appeal, then the club must know the outcome of the original hearing, which were told they don't. So that theory may not be that sound. Plus even if there had been an appeal, we'd still know by now. As I understand it, an appeal does not re-examine all the evidence, so it wouldn't take as long as the original 10 week hearing.

I'd say the only things we can be reasonably sure of is that:
(a) the panel has reached a decision, and probably did so not too long after the end of the hearing,
(b) that decision has not yet been published.
Click to expand...
MCFC’s confidence in the market may well be because we’ve won the hearing and the PL has appealed a chunk of charges? It may explain the delay.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Not if it was being appealed and the appeal maybe taken to arbitration. The Chelsea FA case wasn't published until the appeal was finished as we all know.

As my other theories sink one by one with the inevitable passage of time (my last one being the PL was waiting for the new "SCR" rule book before announcing - although holidays may mean that is still bobbing about on the water), I find myself clinging to some major legal issue(s) holding everything up to keep me afloat, such as Haas's theory that non-compliance shifts the burden of proof from the complainant to the defendant in sporting disciplinary processes. If the PL were claiming something like that, the club would be delighted to take them to the ends of the legal world just to be confrontational, even if it wouldn't have any real effect on the outcome (imho).

Or for that matter, it could be some other legal issue the club chooses to disagree with, or multiple issues. And each challenge could take forever.

Or for that matter, of course, they could just be slow at writing the bloody thing up. Who knows? :)
Click to expand...
Do you think your thoughts on this matter, over such a long time, could be termed a scatter gun approach. You make the forum interesting though ;-)
 
this whole case reeks the bad smell of red cartel and Spurs forcing Masters to go all out against City to do whatever to smear us and rob us. I do hope we put it behind us for once and all and with a result that makes our rivals never dare to go against us ever again. otherwise they will.

but we also need to go back by beating them to PL titles. . do another 4 in a row haha. that would hurt them the most.
 
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