PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[give it to gordon]

Probably 1/20th each (same as us)

City are paying to towards charging ourselves !

This is my point about suing not only are you suing the pl but you are funding the company you are suing to fight you !

 

[cheekybids]

City are paying to towards charging ourselves !

No I made that up…

I just imagined that every club has to contribute & what’s the chances we are included?

Surely any legal costs paid for by 3 or 4 clubs would highlight corruption.

 

[urban genie]

Is there any truth in the rumour that the red shirts are helping the premier league with the legal costs?

No seems like a paranoid social media rumour tbf

 

[WRicko]

Is there no way City can do a sit down interview with Khaldoon and call the Premier League out and explain to the idiots how serious these charges are and how everything has been signed off and the sponsors have done nothing wrong. Surely sponsors are annoyed at what’s going on. Surely deep down the journalists reporting all this know the actual facts like Etihad not related party and know that it’s just mad to accuse the people at city in directly of fraud

 

[Bandofblues]

Yes, it was pure disbelief at UEFA’s stupidity. You can image our team turning to each other:
”What the fuck. Is that it???” “Really?” “What a joke.”
As the man said: ”I just don’t believe it.”
I expect the PL to prove just as assinine.

If this is true then how on earth was it only a 2:1 majority on the CAS panel and not unanimous?

 

[give it to gordon]

If this is true then how on earth was it only a 2:1 majority on the CAS panel and not unanimous?

Because the '1' was picked by UEFA and so I guess was always going to vote in their favour

 

[paulchapo]

The panel in these proceedings should have no interest in football whatsoever, either themselves or anybody associated with them. After all, although these proceedings involve football clubs, they are all about finance and the rules. They don't have to have any knowledge of football at all, just the facts and figures.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Twatter's usually the place for it but if you don't do Twatter you might not know. I would say that when engaging with opposition fans in person, I don't think a single one has ever brought it up. And I include United and Liverpool fans in that.

Was asked in the pub last night by a Birmingham City fan. Told him it was all bullshit and there was no substance to the charges which seemed to accord with what he suspected. He certainly didn’t push back in any way.

 

[Sheikh rattle and roll]

What they risk is a reputation for incompetence and stubbornness which costs the member clubs money. This case could damage their credibility irreparably.

But remember they will also have lawyers who are fairly confident otherwise the charges wouldn’t be issued
Make no mistake about it this is our biggest ever battle in many a year
Hopefully we have irrefutable evidence surely our owner wouldn’t say that if he wasn’t confident of a victory
Otherwise I’m guessing if we thought we would be found guilty we would be trying to negotiate a deal

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

A reminder from Lord Pannick about taking on an almost certain losing case……

People think maybe I can sprinkle some magic dust on their cases – but some cases aren’t winnable. I spend much of my time saying, “Stop, you’ll lose.” Then I hear the words, “This is a matter of principle.” It’s the client’s prerogative. My role is to contribute to justice by making sure that the client’s side is fully argued.’

The essence of advocacy: Lord Pannick QC

In a rare interview, Lord Pannick QC, the barrister at the centre of some of the most critical legal debates this country has seen, reflects on his own role in the theatre of law, celebrates the art of persuasion and discusses his upcoming Hamlyn Lectures. Interview by Anthony Inglese CB

www.counselmagazine.co.uk

I would imagine for every KC that wins, there is a loser.

The opening paragraph:

Advocacy depends as much on listening as on speaking. Listen to what the other side is saying, to what the judge is saying. Watch the body language. There’s no point in ignoring the concerns of the court. There has to be a conversation with the judge. Judges don’t want to be lectured to. They are concerned to get to the right answer, and they want the advocate to help them. Contrast this with advocates who target their clients as the audience (“Fantastic – you really told the judge!”). But the purpose is to persuade, so identify what is causing the judge concern.’

is absolutely on the fucking money.