A certain Email becoming known to a Portuguese hacker and a former employe of ours going to work for the dippers and us not changing his log in details to our scouting info.sorry mate not heard anything about this can you shed some light on it ;)
A certain Email becoming known to a Portuguese hacker and a former employe of ours going to work for the dippers and us not changing his log in details to our scouting info.sorry mate not heard anything about this can you shed some light on it ;)
That is my view, we copied utds image rights when we first started, it is possible we made mistakes, but we would have made a lot of them, that is an awful lot of players upset with City.I have said this same point in the past when people go on about 2nd wages etc..
We have had players leave on good terms, we have players who have left on bad terms. We have agents who have fallen out with the club etc.. At no point has anyone come out as a whistle blower, just think of the publicity and plaudits someone would get by the media masses if they were to provide evidence of off the book payments.
I also laugh that we have lost players to other clubs ( Sterling / Sane ) who have gone for increased wages, well if we were secretly paying them double their reported salary how does this work?
You are right, people need to be rational and not follow the bullshit being pumped out by the media and internet
He's smiling about all the money he is earning from this ridiculous case, he's a professional law is his work he can smile and it not mean anything at allMan 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
I've had it on good authority that this happened (and I know who it came from). More recently I've been told (but I couldn't verify, so treat it with caution) that we were specifically offered a 6-point deduction and a large fine to settle pre-hearing. I don't know if the deduction would have applied last season or this. Obviously our answer to that offer was no. This echoes what happened with UEFA, who offered us a fine to settle, an offer we again rejected.
You can look at this as the PL believing their case wouldn't stand up at a hearing, or that it would and they felt a slightly more severe penalty would be in order (although they have no idea what the IC might do).
Clearly the media weren't told, or if they were, chose not to publicise it for whatever reason.
I'd say it was related to the more serious charge, as they'd presumably want to offer a 'discount' for early settlement. I'd also say that the PL, having handed this to their own Independent Commission, were unlikely to be doing something like this (assuming they did) unilaterally, without reference to Murray Rosen.
Very interesting.
It's the media lynch mob in full blood lust mode, and the punishments they will think up will get more and more bizarre as the week go by, City fans and staff having to take part in public reeducation camps? Pep put in stocks outside the town hall, KDB dragged naked around the streets of Liverpool ? It's going to get worse folks because this is the last chance of derailing the club it will never come again, and those behind it are using their client media to feed red meat to the massesThe telegraph are now saying we will be excluded from the domestic cups as well if found guilty. They're losing the plot
Blimey indeed, given that the PL have absolutely no jurisdiction over any of these competitions.The Telegraph article is saying that we would be looking at being thrown out of the CL, Club World Cup as well as the domestic cups.
Blimey
agreed, the six point deduction would most likely be 12+pts if dished out at a hearingI'd say it was related to the more serious charge, as they'd presumably want to offer a 'discount' for early settlement. I'd also say that the PL, having handed this to their own Independent Commission, were unlikely to be doing something like this (assuming they did) unilaterally, without reference to Murray Rosen.