PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I'm presuming he's just referring to the non co-operation charges
Could the club accept that we are guilty of the non-cooperation charges but seeing as we're not guilty of the serious charges... which have caused us huge reputational damage, stunted our growth, prevented us signing lucrative sponsorship deals etc etc..... we'll settle for NO punishment... otherwise we'll seek damages
 
I seem to remember it was very much like this before the CAS verdict, the media ramping up the opinion that we’d lost the case and we’re going to get hammered, so much so that nobody could believe that, apart from the non-cooperation charge, we were cleared of all the other charges.

Anybody remember Warnock on SSN, telling the world of our guilt, only for the presenter to tell him that it was only the non-cooperation we were done for? Took him a good 30 minutes for it to sink in as he picked his jaw up from the ground.
Warnock should have been sued there and then, he was proper on the verge of scriking then said clear as day “Everbody knows they’ve cheated!”
 
I’ve never heard of the podcaster Rob Moore until just now and I’m not gonna post a link to the video to give him more clicks.

But in his interview with Le Tissier, in a video posted 2 days ago, Moore said: “What do you think about FFP? Have Man City been at it? They must have broken every rule in the book.”

Add him to the list of cunts.
If he's talking to Le Tissier then he's a **** from the off
 
PL rules basically say we have to provide whatever they ask for. One of the few instances where a company is required to help its accuser find it guilty. No fifth amendment here.
In the current case, I assume City will say the PL just went on a massive fishing expedition and it became so onerous that we called a halt.
CAS reduced our fine because of poor practice by UEFA in leaking stuff.
I expect the panel to rule in favour of the PL.

CAS we were found not guilty of all the charges, The fine was for not corresponding with Uefa,
 
PL rules basically say we have to provide whatever they ask for. One of the few instances where a company is required to help its accuser find it guilty. No fifth amendment here.
In the current case, I assume City will say the PL just went on a massive fishing expedition and it became so onerous that we called a halt.
CAS reduced our fine because of poor practice by UEFA in leaking stuff.
I expect the panel to rule in favour of the PL.
My understanding is that the reduction in the sum withheld from City by UEFA was not connected with the leaks. CAS felt it was fair not to pay City 10 million euros due to the club because City had withheld "evidence" from UEFA which it had provided for the CAS hearing. Had the club provide this evidence earlier to UEFA, UEFA would not have punished City and the case would have gone no further. Very charitable view of UEFA perhaps, but there you are!
 
But surely thats a bullshit notion if they have asked for something that city has no right to supply them with?

We must have provided evidence to CAS to find us not guilty, Just like with the Premier League tribunal panel, City would have provided evidence that is watertight,
 
I’ve never heard of the podcaster Rob Moore until just now and I’m not gonna post a link to the video to give him more clicks.

But in his interview with Le Tissier, in a video posted 2 days ago, Moore said: “What do you think about FFP? Have Man City been at it? They must have broken every rule in the book.”

Add him to the list of cunts.
Has to be a dipper fan with a name like that.
 

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.