Mancini was a City employee. We'd have had a big say in any side employment he had. And I assume we'd want everything to be above board. But the Mancini issue is less than £1.5m a year over 3 years. It's nothing. Doesn't make any difference one way or another. At the very worst we might get hit with a £0.5m fine. And that's the very worst.
Interesting stuffMancini was a City employee. We'd have had a big say in any side employment he had. And I assume we'd want everything to be above board. But the Mancini issue is less than £1.5m a year over 3 years. It's nothing. Doesn't make any difference one way or another. At the very worst we might get hit with a £0.5m fine. And that's the very worst.
Which, if our evidence is 'irrefutable', should be exercised in the event of a negative outcome. It is impossible to conceive a scenario whereby a negative outcome wouldn't attract a right of appeal, because an error of law could not be avoided in the light of 'irrefutable' evidence.There is a right of appeal in certain very specific circumstances.
To be honest, I’ve only really seen it suggested on here. Not as fact but as a possible reason as to why the PL might be going all in on us with so many charges because outside of the hacked e-mails and Der Spiegel articles, what more have the Premier League got to think they might get a better outcome than UEFA got at CAS?Any idea where this talk of a whistleblower has come from? I read that it was Sam Lee on Twitter but read his article and there is nothing about whistleblowing in it.
This is a gross misrepresentation by the Mail. This is the normal PL meeting, to which City sent representation. It is not some EGM set up to fuck us over.
Any appeal would be within those appeals procedures outlined by the Premier League.The only thing is that the lawyer in the film says "No right of Appeal". Have I heard this right and is this true? No High Court appeal if we lose ?
I know our club likes to take the ‘holistic’ approach but I hope Soriano at least glares at a couple of them in that meeting.
That was comical Ali. Nothing to do with Chemical Ali.That's funny. Reminds me of chemical allie in the gulf war saying on TV the Iraqis would win and then a shell going off nearby and his chin hitting the floor.
Am I right in thinking that the Mancini thing isn’t even an issue that falls under possible breaches of FFP, given that Premier League FFP only came in at the start of the 2013/14 season and Mancini had left the club by then anyway?Mancini was a City employee. We'd have had a big say in any side employment he had. And I assume we'd want everything to be above board. But the Mancini issue is less than £1.5m a year over 3 years. It's nothing. Doesn't make any difference one way or another. At the very worst we might get hit with a £0.5m fine. And that's the very worst.