PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Stoned Rose]

I very much care if they did with two exceptions, the non-cooperation charges given the PL are acting on others behalf and anything with "in good faith" appended as that's purely subjective rather than objective and can mean anything they like (or are told to like).

I raised a similar point earlier.

“Bad faith” seems such an abstract concept how would you prove what someone’s intentions were?

And how would you even measure it?

 

[hello]

My seemingly sensible brother in law (rag) is convinced if we “get let off” its because we bribed “The FA”.

This is what we are up against.
I asked him what the fuck its got to do with the FA anyway and how any bribe would go down.

He just said “money talks”

:))

Tell your sister/brother to make sure they take full fiscal responsibility for their household finances as he's a fucking idiot if he thinks bribing a totally different organisation would make any difference.

 

[Ducado]

A mate of mine is currently down the rabbit hole about Andy Burnham, claiming he’s knee deep in corruption. He keeps sharing social media posts on our WhatsApp group from what are usually far right accounts. I’ve told him to post his shitty conspiracy theories elsewhere. I think he’s getting a lot of it off Nick Buckley who he claims to be mates with. Now I’m no massive fan of Burnham myself but unless people can prove he’s up to something dodgy then they should shut the fuck up.

It's a rabbit hole once they are in it they find it very difficult to get out, it's the same with "They must be guilty" crowd, they are rival fans and they see it as some sort of game where it's just a bit of banter rather than what is really going on

 

[joeyh123]

I'm sure this has been said a million times in this particular thread. But it hilarious how much fans of other clubs, even clubs that aren't in the top 6 are desperate for likkle old citeh to get relegated to the 2nd division.

And we all know when we come out of this on top our name won't be cleared but jjust more acquisitions of underhanded payments to get out of it.

 

[freshie]

Darke seems to me to be a bit noncey
He always had an unnatural obsession with a teenage footballer

Nonce? This guy? Never ;)

Put it this way - you wouldn't want your kids to run into Ian in a Darke alleyway

 

[ufo]

My seemingly sensible brother in law (rag) is convinced if we “get let off” its because we bribed “The FA”.

This is what we are up against.
I asked him what the fuck its got to do with the FA anyway and how any bribe would go down.

He just said “money talks”

:))

You should’ve said” can city bribe you for an hour? money talks “

 

[ufo]

I very much care if they did with two exceptions, the non-cooperation charges given the PL are acting on others behalf and anything with "in good faith" appended as that's purely subjective rather than objective and can mean anything they like (or are told to like).

More like “Blind faith “ the manner pl and red shirts have ganged up against city .

 

[train man]

No I have seen a few media outlets actually break down all the charges. All it takes is a bit of effort to search for them. I doubt anybody here is going to take the time to keep posting them to everybody who asks.

Right pc, but this guy who messaged you could maybe have been asking what it is actually all about?
I'll be surprised if you have seen the real breakdown of charges in the press, beyond 35 counts of non-cooperation, 45 counts of failure to submit accurate accounts etc etc - I've not once seen any media mention of the real issues as presented here - etihad, etisalat, mancini et al... they are just not interested to look beyond the '115' and insist we must be guilty

 

[thismeansfour]

2

Did anybody get 6? I can picture something along the lines of the closest to United was someone with 6, I thought it was Arsenal, apologies.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I’m not sure if it has before and if not that is clearly wrong.

However if it has I do think that is the correct position to take.

I'm not even sure what those costs were doing in the club's accounts in the first place. They should have been Glazers' costs as they made the money, so I don't really have a problem with taking them back out again. Except that post-Leicester, the written rules are the rules and, as far as I know, there is no rule saying those costs could be deducted. Someone should challenge it :)