You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
There was a program the other day where a an actual court case was actually re run with word for word from the transcript re run in front of two juries.I couldn't understand your response at first but think I've got it now.
There's a big difference in doing something that's deliberately deceptive and doing something you believe you have good grounds for. It's the difference between acting in bad faith and good faith.
For example, we proved to the comfortable satisfaction of the CAS panel that the Etihad sponsorship wasn't disguised equity investment, as we presented evidence that it had come from a source other than ADUG. So unless the PL has an email or other evidence that specifically contradicts that testimony, they will struggle to prove it. If they do have cogent evidence that there was a conspiracy to lie and mislead the panel, then we would be in serious trouble.
Same for Fordham. We didn't do that to hide expenses but to bring in revenue. I assume we took good legal and financial advice about that, and that we didn't act in deliberate bad faith. But the IC could potentially still find us in breach of something, but not that we acted deceptively.
The two juries can to different conclusions.
My point is that even if the evidence is exactly the same different panels won’t necessarily reach the same decision then you have to factor in the different jurisdictions namely the PL rulebook and UEFas then CAS operates under Swiss Law and the PL under English Law
One final point is that surely it wasn’t that City proved to a comfortable satisfaction it was surely the fact that UEFa didn’t
failsworthblueboy
Well-Known Member
Maybe a 10 point reduction is recoverable but, I expect plenty more bullshit rumors over and do not believe this one, can you imagine the Media frenzy over a 10 point reduction, the red Cartel would go into meltdown and would appeal the decision in heartbeat, and if the rules didn't allow them to appeal, they would have the rules changed.all very strange this 6 point business, certainly not enough to relegate us, infact it would hardly impact our season,recoverable over a two week period if other results went our way, ok it may have been 10 points if dished out at a hearing but still 10 is recoverable
Last edited:
marco
Well-Known Member
if you go back on here youl find it, PB mentioned it, you need to make your own mind up about it but PB is a very credible poster infact one of the most knowledgeable on hereWhere has this 6 point thing come from.
Is it reliable?.
Or more bullshit
Last edited:
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
I'd agree with that. The only contrary point is that we did prove, to the comfortable satisfaction of the panel, that the additional payment of the Etihad sponsorship didn't come from ADUG, UEFA couldn't prove otherwise.There was a program the other day where a an actual court case was actually re run with word for word from the transcript re run in front of two juries.
The two juries can to different conclusions.
My point is that even if the evidence is exactly the same different panels won’t necessarily reach the same decision then you have to factor in the different jurisdictions namely the PL rulebook and UEFas then CAS operates under Swiss Law and the PL under English Law
One final point is that surely it wasn’t that City proved to a comfortable satisfaction it was surely the fact that UEFa didn’t
I asked that question before and I don’t understand why city has to pay double legal fees to fuck us and not to fuck us .With the little bit of information coming to light yesterday about MCFC refusing to settle out of court raises the the question where is the the substantial amount of money coming from to pay for the PL legal bill ? This case which the PL brought against MCFC pushed by the red cartel will be the most expensive in PL history and probably ever . So again where is the money coming from ? Who is paying the PL legal bill ………….
Weird situation tbf
What proof do you have we were offered a deal, nobody knows. It's like make believe suddenly becoming reality.We’d have taken a deal if we weren’t 100% confident.
Maybe the settlement is about 'not cooporating' with investigation.A settlement would be an admission of wrong doing. We've said 'fuck that' for a very good reason and rightly so.
Keep the faith, Blues. Our guys have got this.
Are you inspector Clouseau ?What proof do you have we were offered a deal, nobody knows. It's like make believe suddenly becoming reality.
nothing but a shitty poker move by desperate masters and pl. Lord Pannick is not going to fall for his bluffMaybe the settlement is about 'not cooporating' with investigation.