Again, the comments section responding to this article are for the most part scathing about the premier league, not City. Opinion has shifted, as the machinations behind all this are gradually exposed.
Man City write to all 19 clubs to RUBBISH Premier League's win claims
MIKE KEEGAN: City claimed a landmark victory after a tribunal found league rules around commercial deals with parties linked to club owners to be unlawful.www.dailymail.co.uk
If true - City write to all Premier League clubs complaining about PL statement and threatening further legal action - Wowser, the gloves are really off now!
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
Rory Bluelow
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 May 2014
- Messages
- 2,008
….AND KICKING!!!MANCHESTER CITY ARE STILL ALIVE HERE!!!!
Bald fraud
Well-Known Member
You know they’re getting worried when they roll out John bishop!
This is weird. It does not appear in my thread but I can access it thru search.top of the threads still...
Anybody got a clue?
Gaz (FMwkdsoul)
Well-Known Member
might have to ask a mod or @RicThis is weird. It does not appear in my thread but I can access it thru search.
Anybody got a clue?
The decision on the case City brought against the league makes me think the 115 won't be as clear cut either.
I think everyone is expecting an either/or decision. It might be we're successful on defending ourselves against some charges and not on others.
Then comes the arguing over who actually won depending on which charges were proven, etc.
I think everyone is expecting an either/or decision. It might be we're successful on defending ourselves against some charges and not on others.
Then comes the arguing over who actually won depending on which charges were proven, etc.
Kippaxpete
Well-Known Member
Watched the little **** earlier on yapping on about uncompetitiveness in the league and how this decision is going to break football because clubs like the rags the tarquins and dippers can't compete.
Just the same whiney voice but now without the "cheating£ slur because they know that the red tops have been the ones outed for cheating now.
I shouldn't post it but fuck it.
There's no way I'm watching the odious little turd's latest performance and neither should anyone else. Keep clicking on his channel and the disingenuous prick laughs all the way to the bank.
I like the fact Khaldoon was probably sat there as the news broke yesterday, saw the spin the PL tried to put on it, and thought, fuck that!
Gloves are firmly off. Like he said we took our punch. They're getting fuck all else.
I have a feeling we're about to find out that the PL have been bowing to certain clubs at every single turn and it's going to look very very dodgy for a few chairmen and Dick Masters.
Gloves are firmly off. Like he said we took our punch. They're getting fuck all else.
I have a feeling we're about to find out that the PL have been bowing to certain clubs at every single turn and it's going to look very very dodgy for a few chairmen and Dick Masters.
I think a lot of the charges will be - if the first say 5 charges are guilty, then the next 60 will likely be guilty. They cascade into each other.The decision on the case City brought against the league makes me think the 115 won't be as clear cut either.
I think everyone is expecting an either/or decision. It might be we're successful on defending ourselves against some charges and not on others.
Then comes the arguing over who actually won depending on which charges were proven, etc.
Or alternatively if we’re cleared of the first 5 then the next 60 won’t be guilty.
There’s only really 6 different issues spread out over a number of years - with a separate charge for year. The first 5 are very inter related.
The last one which is non cooperation is the one we’re most likely to get found guilty of. But even then it’s not likely to be a sporting sanction as there’s no sporting benefit gained from it.
I think every single charge will be a guilty or not guilty though.
Last edited:
Cobwebcat
Well-Known Member
Should there be a “no” before “sporting” ?I think a lot of the charges will be - if the first say 5 charges are guilty, then the next 60 will likely be guilty. They cascade into each other.
Or alternatively if we’re cleared of the first 5 then the next 60 won’t be guilty.
There’s only really 6 different issues spread out over a number of years - with a separate charge for year. The first 5 are very inter related.
The last one which is non cooperation is the one we’re most likely to get found guilty of. But even then it’s not likely to be a sporting sanction as there’s sporting benefit gained from it.
I think every single charge will be a guilty or not guilty though.