Invisible Man's Bandage
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2020
- Messages
- 3,160
- Team supported
- Manchester City
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
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 17,639
- Team supported
- Manchester City
I'm more of a mind to think (Could be completely way off the mark here but with no information to go on) that the PL if found to be a devious sack of lying bastards and they get thrown out of the hearing with nothing, our club will try their best not to make them out to be the bad guys and allow them time to concoct a story that saves them some face.
Even if miles off the reality of the fact, I seriously hope you are right :)
mexico1970
Well-Known Member
I would be utterly amazed if that was the case, I get the feeling the Khaldoon wants and will get blood if he is correct on the irrefutable evidence.
All our legal costs at the very least would have to be met by the PL.
I honestly believe that if we had been more public we'd have scared the PL and of course the media off mate, we serve sandwiches and sweet treats to journalists that annihilate us in print.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,101
If the verdict takes a long time would it not suggest that our "irrefutable evidence" may not be irrefutable?
Still too much we don't know.
The story is that the hearing is paused until mid-December when the final summations will be heard. When it was paused and why we don't know.
The rumours that it was finished at the beginning of the month may just have been about it having been paused following the two parties presenting their evidence. If that was the case, it ended quickly?
Basically, no-one knows anything :)
100% agree there, we are a very soft touch, hopefully it's not because we have something to hide.I honestly believe that if we had been more public we'd have scared the PL and of course the media off mate, we serve sandwiches and sweet treats to journalists that annihilate us in print.
mexico1970
Well-Known Member
100% agree there, we are a very soft touch, hopefully it's not because we have something to hide.
If we'd have turned the coach around after the vermin bricked and bottled it, if we would have forced the issue when that young girl got injured with a cup full of coins, if we would have hammered Klipperty and Liverpool for the "Bad day for football" comment we wouldn't be here or at least they would know we don't take any shit.
There was nothing good about Pep joining in the Klopp wankfest when he left to join Red Bull either, should have said what he meant and if he DID mean what he said then the world's fucked :)
Bournemouth Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2015
- Messages
- 2,087
I think there is something to be said for holding the moral high ground.If found guilty, there would be more hatred if we had gone more aggressive. As it stands, City are just letting the process take its course, and will no doubt react when the verdict is established. My guess is that if found innocent, they will compromise on expenses, move on and avoid further confrontation. If found guilty, this could be cataclysmic.100% agree there, we are a very soft touch, hopefully it's not because we have something to hide.
Agreed but if we were found to be 100% innocent and the panel believed that the charges brought were totally unreasonable, would the club not have to act?I think there is something to be said for holding the moral high ground.If found guilty, there would be more hatred if we had gone more aggressive. As it stands, City are just letting the process take its course, and will no doubt react when the verdict is established. My guess is that if found innocent, they will compromise on expenses, move on and avoid further confrontation. If found guilty, this could be cataclysmic.
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
You could spin that the other way to be fair in that the PL's evidence isn't irrefutable either!If the verdict takes a long time would it not suggest that our "irrefutable evidence" may not be irrefutable?
Or it could be that the amount of evidence the panel need to sift through - irrefutable or otherwise - means that this was always going to take several months or more for both the hearing and subsequent write-up and verdict, even if it turns out to be a slam dunk for either side.
There are people far better qualified than me on this forum who know their onions with this type of thing but I've never been convinced by this theory that the quicker the hearing ended the better it is for us, so I'm quite relaxed if this takes another 12 months or more before we get to know the outcome. Of course, I want to know sooner as does everybody else but we don't get to decide the timeline on these things.
crystal_mais
Well-Known Member
for this to have gone the distance and the teams to go away and come back for final deliberations, tells me it's not a slam dunk as we thought we may have.
On the flip side - its not the slam dunk that the haters assumed.
Nerve racking !!
On the flip side - its not the slam dunk that the haters assumed.
Nerve racking !!