Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Not Chelsea, according to Swiss Ramble.
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
The likelihood is that it will be on the none co-operation charges as these are the hardest to argue as they are subjective rather than finite and i believe thats why they were added, the legal team of the pl knew they didnt have a prayer of making the main stuff stick so they added a load of other fluff on so the whole thing didnt look as ridiculous as it plainly is.While listening to it, i was thinking. They were talking as if we're either going to be found guilty or not guilty.
Is it not more likely that we are found guilty of some of the charges but not all of them?
Therefore the punishment will be dependant on what these are.
got to be the geordiesNot Chelsea, according to Swiss Ramble.
wolviedinho
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 21,254
- Location
- Doublethink
- Team supported
- Super City from Maine Road(not wolves)
Guilty of being called Man City.While listening to it, i was thinking. They were talking as if we're either going to be found guilty or not guilty.
Is it not more likely that we are found guilty of some of the charges but not all of them?
Therefore the punishment will be dependant on what these are.
Anything else is orchestrated to stop the club winning.
I would have no problem with the premier league’s investigation if they applied the same approach to all clubs.
I don’t care about emails or hacks. You have ffp/psr rules in place. Every club should be scrutinised to make sure they adhere not 1 club because the other 6 don’t like us.
The red cartel are only a club like any other but the problem is that they are pulling the strings.
Nothing fair about it.
Last edited:
wolviedinho
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 21,254
- Location
- Doublethink
- Team supported
- Super City from Maine Road(not wolves)
I actually think they knew from the start that proving the 3/6 substantial charges was nearly impossible based on the evidence and the high bar set. So threw their toys out and splashed 115 everywhere with the help of the 6 teams that hate us.The likelihood is that it will be on the none co-operation charges as these are the hardest to argue as they are subjective rather than finite and i believe thats why they were added, the legal team of the pl knew they didnt have a prayer of making the main stuff stick so they added a load of other fluff on so the whole thing didnt look as ridiculous as it plainly is.
115/130 means we have already won before it started but at the same time already lost if that makes sense.
Leicester.Not Chelsea, according to Swiss Ramble.
Haven't they some cloud still over them
Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
The likelihood is that it will be on the none co-operation charges as these are the hardest to argue as they are subjective rather than finite and i believe thats why they were added, the legal team of the pl knew they didnt have a prayer of making the main stuff stick so they added a load of other fluff on so the whole thing didnt look as ridiculous as it plainly is.
i tend to think that anything that is hard to argue due to being subjective should be hardest to find guilty on.
unless there are some clear points to be made, in which case it's not hard to argue.
( maybe my phrasing is suspect though )
i see your point but the reverse could also be true in that if its black and white its either guilty or not and therefore not open to interpretation, however when its subjective then its easier to find guilty on (im thinking of the CAS ruling) even tho its bullshit and spurious at best.i tend to think that anything that is hard to argue due to being subjective should be hardest to find guilty on.
unless there are some clear points to be made, in which case it's not hard to argue.
( maybe my phrasing is suspect though )
Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
Always said the same. They knew what was coming between PSG and City and tried to lower the shutter. Unfortunately City slid under just in time.
It's never been about protecting smaller clubs from themselves or even parity. They just wanted a glass ceiling.
i think you're wrong on that. I believe it to be a drawbridge that they tried to lift up but we got over it just in time.
time will tell i reckon.