PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Matt Diablo]

Shut down the hearing, the Dunney Monster says we’ve nothing to worry about

Got to love 1tonneDunne - not his double figures of own goals though! Shit I saw too many of them live:(

 

[manimanc]

He is right. The case is a sham. It's already a done deal . . .

I've still got a tenner in my back pocket with your name on if you give us a little bit more meat on the bone as to why you are very confident. :)

 

[cheekybids]

having seen the key documents, are we allowed to put forward additional related documents?

for silly instance if they said that the Sheikh was seen in a cafe with Mancini handing him a gold bar on Christmas day. Could City go away and get a document confirming that the Sheikh was in Abu Dhabi and Mancini was at Disney World on the day in question and whats more the cafe shuts on christmas day.

I think documents would have gone back & forth so all evidence should be in, so if they’d said that they’d have already been told that Sheik Mansour was at Pizza Express in Woking that day.

 

[M12Blue]

Man City Till I Die - Facebook

Lord Pannick KC who’s leading the City group in representing Manchester City vs the Premier League was pictured smiling outside the International Dispute Resolution Centre earlier YESTERDAY when he came out of court.

Does that smile make you think we are about to lose the biggest case in sports history? No because we have the best representing us.

View attachment 132257

Sneaked out without paying for his sandwich.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Again we're back to the point (that you still haven't answered) that City had no choice but to sign up to the rules in the first place or else face equal or possibly even more severe consequences than they're now potentially facing

That’s life mate.

You as an individual are bound by every law in the land. You have no choice. Break them and off you pop to spend some time at HMP.

Whether you like it or not or agree with it or not.

Same for City and this. Either sign up and abide by the rules or fuck off. We signed up.

 

[Blue Mist]

@slbsn what is your opinion that the rags claimed 35 million for the sale of the shares to Scruffy Jim ?
It is surely a private matter between the Glazer family, who owned and were selling the shares and Scruffy. Would Scuffy be allowed to see company info which meant solicitors acting for the club had to be involved ?


Or was it just another con job ?

 

[nmc]

All i hear from every **** is its obvious were guilty because they wouldn't of charged us with 115 if we didnt do something wrong. Its just a case of what punishment we get now and the only defence we have is to bribe our way to a lighter sentence of maybe a 30 point deduction

Just ask these cunts why if we are so guilty of so many accounting and fraud charges why the police, SFO or HMRC seem to have zero interest in our case ?

 

[jacko74]

“then there are some rules that are entirely unjust and iniquitous and only in place to benefit and enrich a certain section of society, chiefly the wealthy and privileged”

Give me some examples?

Whether we had a choice or not to sign up is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we did. Therefore, we simply have to abide by the rules.

Your “it’d be ok to breach the rules because I don’t agree with them” approach is infantile and not how the real world works.

Let’s say the dippers now go and breach a raft of the rules and as result won the next 5 prems, would you back them if they took the stance of “fuck it, the rules are shit anyway” and advocate for them avoiding sanctions?

So many ridiculous, irrelevant straw man arguments it's barely worth even trying to debate with you.

If any club decided to ignore or circumvent FFP/PSR then I'd say good luck to them as its a corrupt, unjust and iniquitous ruling aimed at giving an advantage to certain clubs over others ... if a club decides that the handball or offside rule no longer applies to them then obviously they deserve to be sanctioned because its a fair and just rule that is there for the benefit of the game as a whole, is applied even handedly and offers no advantage to any one club over another.

 

[jacko74]

That’s life mate.

You as an individual are bound by every law in the land. You have no choice. Break them and off you pop to spend some time at HMP.

Whether you like it or not or agree with it or not.

Same for City and this. Either sign up and abide by the rules or fuck off. We signed up.

You really are talking shit now.

Rag or dipper?

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

No we don’t… allegedly-:)


Don’t buy the opinion that you have to abide by protectionist rules. City today in its current form would be Newcastle or worse Everton.

The club had no choice but to sign up and to find ways around it.

This is what Khaldoon was referring to when he spoke of "the tyranny of the majority". Lord Salisbury touched on the same principle when he explained that a free society was not one where six men (!) had the right to tell five men what they must do. Most free societies have a declaration of fundamental rights which must not be infringed by new laws. The PL's constitution includes no such limitations and a two thirds vote of members can enact any new rules. Thus (as proposed by our neighbours from Stretford) the PL voted for FFP rules which limit severely the right of owners and shareholders to invest in their club, despite a prohibition on such limitations being expressed clearly in law. City have taken proceedings against APT on the grounds that they conflict with the laws of the land. The complication in this case is that City are not accused of breaking these unenforceable rules but of avoiding them by unquestionably unlawful ways. City's defence is, however, the only one possible: we haven't done it and we can answer all charges with "irrefutable" evidence.