PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Well at least this season can be the proverbial ice bath for them then!

PS: my 13 year old daughter is now at the stage of crying upon each conceded goal. I have tried to explain how football usually works

I remember my lad at that age, who accompanied me to Villa Park on Saturday some twelve years later, started watching City with me at that age in 2011, and never saw us lose until the Wigan Cup Final in 2013. Talk about spoilt!

 

[jaiguruKun]

My point is you would not use a none City email address for city stuff unless you’re doing something wrong and expecting to be caught. It’s bad practice same as politicians and what’s apps etc

He was acting in his role as special advisor to AD executive affairs when sending the emails.

 

[slbsn]

Hate to be one of those people but heard another positive soft signal (not transfer related) this morning. Seems to me that it would be incompatible with a finding of serious wrong doing at the club. I can't say anything specific but consistent with the other soft signals (being something in the background that would seem unlikely if a seriously negative outcome was coming from the case).

 

[Stoned Rose]

Hate to be one of those people but heard another positive soft signal (not transfer related) this morning. Seems to me that it would be incompatible with a finding of serious wrong doing at the club. I can't say anything specific but consistent with the other soft signals (being something in the background that would seem unlikely if a seriously negative outcome was coming from the case).

Do tell….

 

[slbsn]

Do tell….

Just a soft signal. Not saying more and maybe shouldn't have said on that basis but soft signals are really all we have.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Just a soft signal. Not saying more and maybe shouldn't have said on that basis but soft signals are really all we have.

Fair fucks mate. Thanks for sharing :)

 

[kinkladze10]

Inviting an allegation that I'm arrogant again, but the textbook is wrong if it does say that. Really is as simple as that. If you show me exactly what it says I can explain but there is only one standard of proof in civil cases: the balance of probabilities.

The more serious the allegation, the less likely it is to have occurred. But this does not mean that where a serious allegation is in issue, the standard of proof required is higher. It means only that the inherent probability or improbability of an event is itself a matter to be taken into account when weighing the probabilities and deciding whether, on balance, the event occurred see H (Minors) [1996] A.C. 563 at 586 per Lord Nicholls.

It is well discussed in this case https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/form...Bank+St+Petersburg+PJSC+v+Vitaly+Arkhangelsky

Here’s a snippet from the text back.

 

[BlueMoonRisin’]

Just a soft signal. Not saying more and maybe shouldn't have said on that basis but soft signals are really all we have.

 

[dadnlad]

Hate to be one of those people but heard another positive soft signal (not transfer related) this morning. Seems to me that it would be incompatible with a finding of serious wrong doing at the club. I can't say anything specific but consistent with the other soft signals (being something in the background that would seem unlikely if a seriously negative outcome was coming from the case).

bloody hell you've done it now turkey cooking on hold while i read another 50 pages

merry christmas everyone x

 

[snorky]

bloody hell you've done it now turkey cooking on hold while i read another 50 pages

merry christmas everyone x

Fuck me mate, that must be an enormous gobbler! :)