PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[WRicko]

Sorry mate, I think we are at cross purposes.

I assumed (even) he wouldn’t be so stupid as to compare what City have been alleged to do, with what the PL has has been judicially found to do.

What City have been accused of is unquestionably criminal. It’s a fraudulent conspiracy. All day.
But likely to be blown out of the water. So nothing to compare this stage.

Thought he was simply trying to downplay the extent of the PL fuck up.

Anyway, I’m done talking about the **** for the day!

I suspect he is comparing them in that they are both illegal and I suspect he thinks we are guilty but I am sure he is aware of how much more serious our issues is and how much harder it is to prove

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It boggles my brain that this is such an issue for some people.
Nothing the premier league do should be illegal or unlawful. It’s a stupid arguments for morons.

It’s fucking insane that people can’t (or choose not to) see this.

 

[Protein Junkie]

I thought one was a sick bird

Sick swan ?

 

[Blue_Lightsaber]

Blocked :)

Him and Turd Pants are 2 of the worst ones. Sky/ Daily Fail and others as well.

 

[Protein Junkie]

Both entail an act which is contrary to what is lawful. Whist they aren’t identical, as one tends to deal with what is proscribed by law and the other where it’s outside the bounds of the law, any comparison between the two is intellectually dishonest in the context of the subject matter, namely a clause in an agreement, which his only going to be criminal in the most extreme of circumstances.

Through the prism of rules that one organisation subjects the other to, unlawfulness is egregious. Any attempt to claim it’s not illegal is both a non-sequitur and simple semantics.

It’s akin to claiming that because you didn’t get sent to jail for speeding that provides some form of mitigation when it’s not an imprisonable offence.

It’s dishonest misdirection, nothing more.

Like I said previously, no point engaging with the ****.

Brilliant post.
I have not one iota of what you are saying @gordondaviesmoustache but instinct counts ?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Brilliant post.
I have not one iota of what you are saying @gordondaviesmoustache

Me neither!

 

[Sky Blue Mon]

what it said , illegal means in contradiction to an established law, unlawful is in breach of a statute or supposedly morally incorrect.

• llegal
  Means something is against the law or not authorized by law. It's most commonly used to describe a criminal offense that breaches an express prohibition and usually results in a penalty.
  
  
  
• Unlawful
  Means something is against the law or not authorized by law, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a penalty. An unlawful act may arise in a situation where there is no express prohibition, but the act still results in non-compliance with the relevant law or rules. For example, overparking is an unlawful act, but it's not necessarily considered particularly blameworthy.

Thought illegal was a sick bird

 

[mexico1970]

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

View attachment 134838

Ed Woodward looks like the sort of small time **** who checks how much his food and drink came to and only chip that amount, rounded up to the nearest fiver, into the middle.

 

[mexico1970]

Ed Woodward looks like the sort of small time **** who checks how much his food and drink came to and only chip that amount, rounded up to the nearest fiver, into the middle.

Looks a mix between Ian hislop and Himmler.