PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Kippaxpete]

Dear @bridgeno1
Apparently, the Alan Davies autobiography is absolutely essential reading for any self respecting tarqunt. Why don't you stay humble and immerse yourself in it for a few hours. In one hilarious chapter he describes how he took some mind bending hallucinogenic drugs which actually led him to believe arsenil were crowned champions of Europe.
Best wishes
Leonardo x
View attachment 134518

That'll be the same Alan Davies who, in 2007, bit a homeless man's ear in a drunken rant. Best described in the following extract from the Guardian's account at the time.

The details are still woolly, but it seems that Davies had been so upset and emotional attending the funeral of BBC producer Verity Lambert that the only possible solution was to drink 11 pints and start a fight with the nearest street performer.
It appears Davies took exception to being called "Jonathan Creek". (Maybe he'd have preferred "Davo" or "Big Al".)

Clearly, a typically self-absorbed, celebrity twat.

 

[Keeper!]

The " Visit Rwanda " sponsorship logo seems to have been more successful than the Tories attempts top promote It.

( anybody know how much it is worth ? )

The ex Tory government probably paid for most of it.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

The ex Tory government probably paid for most of it.

You and I paid for it - the tories never use their own money.

 

[Keeper!]

I think this is one of the fundamental misunderstandings that's happening. Arsenal, Everton, Brighton etc haven't done anything wrong re shareholder loans as the current rules (that City voted for btw) state that shareholder loans don't bear interest.

City have subsequently challenged this (and had this challenge upheld) meaning that moving forward this rule is likely to be amended. At that points clubs will need to comply with it but that's only after an amendment is made. At the present moment it's perfectly legal - I suspect it won't be after the rules get amended (assuming 60% of PL clubs vote for it - they may also decide not to of course).

Missudestading or not it was wrong and unlawful and those clubs you mentioned including your own have been more than happy to jump on the anti arab/city bandwagon.

For a club sponsored by "oil" money (Emirates) and amazingly Rwanda, I think your club needs to be carefull, glass houses etc

 

[oakiecokie]

I know you think it's some sort of gotcha, but the bold bit isn't right. The club voted in November 2021 to approve the principles recommended, but that doesn't mean anything significant. They voted against the actual proposed rules in general meeting in December 2021 and the club reserved its right to challenge the legality of the rules and the fmv process.

View attachment 134520

I think the phrase "you now own him" spring to mind. ;)

 

[Keeper!]

You and I paid for it - the tories never use their own money.

Exactly!

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

As you don't listen @brigeno1, and you're still here. This the HUGE weakness of the PL case. In the last 20 years there have been 400 sets of accounts filed by clubs at Companies House AND approved by the PL audit processes. So its fundamental to understand the level of resolution, the detail, the nitty gritty that has been required in all 400 set of accounts. The PL Handbooks have only specified in general terms about audited accounts being produced to generally accepted accounting principles. and in good faith etc. But the PL are saying selectively that information not provided by MCFC constituted "concealment". This matters because where there is no concealment, no criminality and no 'mistakes' ALL the false accounting charges prior to 2018 are time barred. The PL could take any club's accounts from any year, ask for more detailed information and then say it was 'concealment'. It just wont stand up because there are hundreds of examples where they have accepted the resolution/detail in other club's accounts. The intense micro scrutiny of the most successful club is a 100% pure witch hunt organized by an illegal cartel of commercial competitors.
And here are the cartel planning the witch hunt

 

[Keeper!]

I know you think it's some sort of gotcha, but the bold bit isn't right. The club voted in November 2021 to approve the principles recommended, but that doesn't mean anything significant. They voted against the actual proposed rules in general meeting in December 2021 and the club reserved its right to challenge the legality of the rules and the fmv process.

View attachment 134520

 

[Skrastins]

It's not looking good for us so don't build your hopes up.

He probably also writes fanfics about him and Havertz going on a date and Saka is the priest in they’re wedding

 

[JPAMCR]

I like the bit about a 'heated debate'. Perhaps the Lords also exchanged a few punches, as if!!

Mrs Merton might be the lead at the IP