PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

bang on mate,who gives a shit what other fans think, but worldwide i think we have a lot of respect from fans of other clubs,i recently was was in Dominican and a Boca fan from Argentina wanted my city top to give to his dad, Man City is the topic abroad they love what we have recently achieved, football is as corrupt in other countries as it is here, my guess we have more support taking the PL on and winning than those wanting us stuffed and stitched up
When in the Dominican 5 years ago it cost me two City shirts that bar staff wanted because they were made about Us
 
I was a voice in the wilderness when the breakaway Super league was muted. Everyone got misty eyed - jumpers for goal posts, ahh Bisto, rattles and rosettes.
The super league had financial rules written up by the Glazers and Florentino Perez specifically to fuck us over - it was literally one of Perez's selling points to the other clubs.

 
well you yourself put it out in your last comment. you are being a bit obtuse on the word "serious". no one is asking you if the whole hearing will take place in the court rather if there are "serious" disputes with the way the panel is handling things. besides disagree with how interpret section 68 of the act.

The rulebook says we can challenge the result under section X.37 which can be seen below.
View attachment 68465

Section 68 of the act:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/23/section/68

Serious irregularity means an irregularity of one or more of the following kinds which the court considers has caused or will cause substantial injustice to the applicant—

(a)failure by the tribunal to comply with section 33 (general duty of tribunal);

(b)the tribunal exceeding its powers (otherwise than by exceeding its substantive jurisdiction: see section 67);

(c)failure by the tribunal to conduct the proceedings in accordance with the procedure agreed by the parties;

(d)failure by the tribunal to deal with all the issues that were put to it;

(e)any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award exceeding its powers;

(f)uncertainty or ambiguity as to the effect of the award;

(g)the award being obtained by fraud or the award or the way in which it was procured being contrary to public policy;

(h)failure to comply with the requirements as to the form of the award; or

(i)any irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings or in the award which is admitted by the tribunal or by any arbitral or other institution or person vested by the parties with powers in relation to the proceedings or the award.


reading that don't you think if the it will be pretty easy to file a case under 68(a), 68(c), 68(g), 68(i) if say the arbitration panel shafts us by being unfair in the process of examining the evidence, say if they refuse to accept our exculpatory evidence, or if they corruptly make a decision through external pressure, or if they give us a excessive punishment. it clearly says in the act that it is possible to challenge those "serious" issues. so yes you are being obtuse with the word "serious"
 
I am really worried we may were naive and did not collect as much dirt as we can on rivals. now would be the time unleash series of allegations, bring back the hacking scandal into spotlight etc.
 
The super league had financial rules written up by the Glazers and Florentino Perez specifically to fuck us over - it was literally one of Perez's selling points to the other clubs.

Yep, but would have been starting from scratch - not going back to the year dot. Thought they'd screw/stitch us eventually and was time to try something new.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.