Because few of them are proper journalists who can be bothered to do something journalistic like, you know, actually reading the CAS judgement and understanding it. Just regurgitating the groupthink that we 'got away with it on a technicality'. However, the actual 'technicality' was that there wasn't sufficient evidence that anything wrong had been done.Financially it is the most serious, and probably in the overall issue of deception. But we know from CAS that it's nonsense, so it's quite bizarre that the PL are going down that route. As we've said before, why is no one in the media making that connection?
He was so 'calm' he failed to counter any of Jordan's anti City bullshit.Jordan back to being a **** again and peddling conspiracy theories about the panel. I’d also like him to explain what the inconsistencies were in the witness statements given to CAS.
How Stefan manages to keep so calm in the face of such confrontational bullshit is beyond me!
You can't take photos of the invisible man :)If the press are outside the building taking photos of our legal team then you would expect photos of the witnesses to be taken too. Is it too early in the proceedings for witnesses to attend ?
reading between lines they hope to discredit witnesses or one or more senior figures not showing up as all aged a few year since CASAgreed about the proof. Seems to me the PL won't have had access during the investigation to the external information they need and won't have access to it in front of the panel, at least not in the form they would need it, to prove the serious allegations even if the club did do what is alleged.
isnt he claiming another stolen email miraculouly turned up after CAS saying something other than witness statmentJordan back to being a **** again and peddling conspiracy theories about the panel. I’d also like him to explain what the inconsistencies were in the witness statements given to CAS.
How Stefan manages to keep so calm in the face of such confrontational bullshit is beyond me!
I think your last point is very important. Any "win" that we get must be good enough to shut the media up. Rival fans are irrelevant since they are going to continue to peddle the lie that we are guilty, whatever happens.It's really hard to judge in this case, because whilst it's playing out behind closed doors there's immense public scrutiny. Any settlement is a sign of weakness from the PL and an admission of guilt from City. And without knowing what that was it's hard to make a true judgement. There could be a number of commercial reasons why City couldn't rather than wouldn't accept a settlement - in terms of an admission of guilt. And you'd expect the PL, aware of the optics, would have offered something that had a substantial impact on our chances of success this season.
There doesn't appear to be much difference with what's on the table here in terms of charges, and what UEFA levelled at us. And it's always positive to have case law, or in this instance, the CAS verdict, to quote and utilise as part of our defence this time around. I don't believe there's anything additional the PL have other than the hacked emails, although I could be wrong.
If you're turning up to an independent panel with the same accusations, even if rules and legislation differ, it's helpful as I said to point to the CAS verdict and provide their opinion on inflated sponsorships/sources of income etc.
I just cannot see the club settling regardless of what was on the table, when the public perception is that we're guilty. That might not change even with a "win" at the independent panel in terms of your social media content from rival fans, but it will have to from the media and anyone employed to comment or they open themselves to a legal battle of their own.
Terry Flewers is at least as big a jerk off as Mark Goldfish.Does that 35 mins include the injury time? In which case it was 35 mins out of a total of 54/55 mins, so not such a good figure after all