PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

blueste41 said:
I'm struggling to see what your (and the other 33 people who liked your comment) Problem is with Burnham's letter. He specifically stated that he thought Everton had a case to answer. The points raised in the letter were about the premier league shifting the goalposts mid process and essentially being a corrupt regime, which many in here would agree with?! Surely making a case for a flawed process by association this should strengthen our position? As for not commenting on the City charges, what could he currently say? There is not enough information in the public domain for him to make a case for City and he waited until Everton's case had completed before commenting on them.


View attachment 99848
Click to expand...
It's the sudden finding of his voice- he knows there's a major club just down the road, that have invested in and improved Manchester greatly, that have been under attack for years, yet he pipes up now.
 
Note: it was Andy Burham MP whose hard work and persistence got the documentation of Hillsborough published, revealing the lying police bastards, the disgraceful reporting of the Sun, and the fixed inquests into the deaths.
 
danielwood5 said:
Why hasn't Curly Watts come out and used his platform to call them out????
No leadership from Curly once again, good ol' Boris would have stood up for us, salt of the earth man of the people that he is.
Click to expand...
Curly could have released a single highlighting the angst we’ve faced waiting for the verdict, featuring Russell Watson, Cleopatra and Adam Rickett.

Gail Platt could have released a commemorative nude calendar too.
 
The perfect fumble said:
It wouldn't require much to blow away City's preposterous charges, the body of evidence required to prove this nonsense simply isn't there, if it was, after all this time, we'd be talking punishment not independent wotsits.

But no one with any clout will call it out, so the Premier League continues to flounce about bollock naked coz no one is willing to laugh at its tiny dick.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this ^
 
bluemonkey71 said:
Excuse my ignorance but were QC’s/KC’s used by the PL to get to the point where they charged us or was it internal lawyers used by the PL? We saw a rushed job in their excitement to hit us with the charges. Just wondering if it was managed by a load of amateurs and now they could be wasting money on expensive KCs getting their arguments pulled apart.
Click to expand...
No just PL lackies with instructions to find some dirt, unfortunately for them they couldn't so charged anyhow Its just a strategy to dirty City's name and achievements
 
hello said:
There is no fucking way a QC/KC approved their initial notification of charges, The shear number of errors was unprecedented. It was a rushed release because of the imminent government announcement. I would expect they were employing a QC during the investigation process & they were simply no where near ready when masters bowed to dipper/rag pressure to announce prior to the government recommending independent regulation.
Click to expand...
It was actually the Spurs chairman
 
city2 said:
I’m not bothered by the outcome I’ve seen City stuff all the teams and I can die a happy man because we have the best players the best football and the best manager and players to have played for City
Click to expand...

Bit selfish that!

What about my kids, they don't want the ride to end and eventually they will have their own kids being brought up on tales of this incredible period?

Plenty of us feel we have suffered for their future and has probably cost us many more years of life.
 
BongoBlue said:
From our "friends" at RTE today - apologies if already posted:

https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2023/1127/1418668-manchester-city-fans-sportswashing/

Well I guess BM is famous now: we are linked in this article. Apparently for this "study", they wanted to see how the average City fan was able to justify our stance about our (brilliant) ownership. Warning, there are links to Delooney and David Conn in here also.
Click to expand...


Sportswashing is definitely a strange one to throw at Abu Dhabi. If anything Sheikh Mansour’s investment in City has drawn attention to human rights issues in the UAE. Let's face it, you can understand why Russia and Saudi Arabia try to normalise themselves in world affairs by hosting events. They are for different reasons brutal regimes. They probably should be pariah nations but money talks.

If it wasn’t for City most punters would see Abu Dhabi as the duller more serious big brother of Dubai. Dubai has managed to host a number of events as a neutral venue for some sports or a safe place for others (Afghani cricketers). It is primarily a Middle East business and tourist spot, bit gaudy for me, but until recently no one has been particularly concerned with human rights there. It’s pretty safe, friendly to western ideals and very modern and as a result the average construction worker wasn’t really give much thought until recently.

I’m all for highlighting issues like abuse of workers or lack of journalistic freedom or poor human rights but very few people seemed to care about human rights in Abu Dhabi or UAE’s involvement in Yemen until City started winning. There is a general acceptance of the UAE as a western ally in an uncertain Middle East. Dubai is advertised extensively, emirates sponsor arsenal and the FA Cup. That doesn’t seem to be a problem. Nor was Sheikh Mansour’s investment in Barclays. Human rights weren’t an issue then. They are now though.

Equally it has become an established fact, despite the truth, that City are a state owned club. In fact one of the studies cited in the thesis referred to by RTE was by our old friend Nicholas McGeechan who decided City were state owned as Khaldoon is running the club. That was enough for him.

I would be far more comfortable with the bona fides of those denigrating the club, and now the supporters, if our rivals were given the same level of scrutiny. Newcastle obviously will be but outside that? Dodgy investment funds, dodgy betting sites, dodgy owners in general. All mostly, a few determined journalists aside, ignored.

The focus has been on us and lately Newcastle, though I resent the lumping both together. UAE and Saudi are completely different cases in terms of human rights and Newcastle are far more clearly state owned. Throwing us both in the same lot suits our detractors and has a smell of something more sinister.

At the weekend there was a protest about Ahmed Mansoor around City which, without City’s Abu Dhabi connection, wouldn’t have had the same profile. Sheikh Mansour’s ownership far from sportswashing UAE’s reputation puts it in the spotlight. His connection to City shines a light of certain matters that would ordinarily be unseen.

I wish, though, that those decrying UAE over human rights and other issues did so for moral and ethical purposes rather than partisan sporting reasons. Journalists like Ronay can bask in Russian hospitality while castigating our Emirati owner. Football has often had dubious morals, it would be better if standards were applied equally.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Bit selfish that!

What about my kids, they don't want the ride to end and eventually they will have their own kids being brought up on tales of this incredible period?

Plenty of us feel we have suffered for their future and has probably cost us many more years of life.
Click to expand...
Character building.

And I think regardless of the outcome, this won't stop us. Just a temporary setback if it doesn't go our way.
 
Ducado said:
I’ve seen some threads drift off topic, but this one has been swept away, large chunks of it need to go in off topic, so angry blokes can shout at each other in peace

The only thing worth reading is the opinion of people that actually have an understanding of the situation
Click to expand...
Why are you posting then?


:-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top