PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

halfcenturyup said:
Fair enough, good work. I think you will find in 2009/10 there were two handbooks, in the first the club breached C75. This rule was split into two breaches in the second book: C79 and C80.

So I think the club didn't breach C80 in the first book.

I think :)
Click to expand...
cheers,

I'm just reading though all the handbooks and my thoughts are we're going to beat these easily as the wording is very specific which works in our favour. I'm on to the 15/16 handbook and it's all the same stuff except the E53 to E60 rules which is about related parties. Easily cleared up as the best the PL could hope for is associated parties plus it was cleared up in CAS anyway. We're going to wipe the floor with them. I'm extremely optimistic now.
 
I'm sure I'm not the only person feeling quietly confident, but also with a nagging doubt that there might be something lurking in the background.

For reassurance I watched one of Stefan's interviews on Talksport following the Leicester loophole.
He was asked if City could find any similar loopholes and he immediately asserted that City had been charged for something surrounding the Mancini contract that technically wasn't even the rule at that precise moment in time

Naturally he was interrupted by the sneering Jordan but if that's true, then alongside the wording of the Leicester loophole, and also the errors in the original publication of the PL allegations (grass too long etc) then that's already three errors that we're aware of, and the strong possibility that there might be more.

We still face a potential smoking gun, but surely someone would have heard something by now,. especially with Omar Berruda switching to the rags.

In fact the only thing that really concerns me is City's PR which for some reason, they deem to be unimportant.and maybe not even necessary
Khaldoon has been offered 2-3 opportunities to speak directly, but on each occasion has opted for a soft interview with Chris Bailey
I appreciate that he couldn't speak directly about the hearing, but he could have been more bullish about the CAS verdict and the subsequent revisionism from the usual suspects.
Instead he hid behind "I'll speak strongly after the verdict" which frankly, I fear will be too late, regardless of the outcome.

That's why I remain convinced that City will be exonerated of the serious charges, but it will be reported as though we got away with it.
 
Sir Joe Aguero said:
If we’re exonerated twice, they can get to fuck. We’ll have done fuck all wrong and they’ve tarnished our reputation because of an illegal hack and the red clubs throwing their weight around.
Click to expand...

Not saying I disagree but I would not be surprised if publicly nothing is seen to be done.

It’s also worth noting although not always for us fans, but the best outcomes do not always come from public battles.
 
crossie said:
That’s quite funny imo
Click to expand...
For me this is not funny but stupid. I would like to know more about the charges from the specialists like Maguire or slbsn, not from all these twats who know nothing. Find proves, we will talk. After two years from 115 they are rewriting the same stories non stop.
 
BerkshireBlue said:
no the go beyond but these are the non compliance ones. see below

View attachment 132047
Click to expand...
I should add probably only the last one is of concern. The others state no timeframe or urgency so it doesn't even matter when you produce the stuff they want as long as you do it (according to the rules as written). The last one does say "prompt" but that is just having access to the people rather than the docs anyway. In short, the PL can go fuck themselves
 
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.