i doubt goldie locks Lord Farquaad would do itI wonder if Stefan and Jordan had a chat off air
i doubt goldie locks Lord Farquaad would do itI wonder if Stefan and Jordan had a chat off air
They will fail again in the next financial year.
Wasn't the lack of similar limitations affecting the PL, cited as one of the reasons UEFA's time barred evidence would finally be used to sink City?I don't thibk it can possibly be that, re differently length of limitations. Different interpretation of the same evidencs, sure (we saw that at CAS as well). But different limitations would then reinforce the basic (and false) throwaway that we got away with it with Uefa due to timebarring, when the club have claimed thatbeven the time barred evidence was in order and consistent with the rest, and CAS did not argue that.
They WOULD fail it, but I thought the current rules were being significantly amended next year?They will fail again in the next financial year.
I said sometime back if City had cooked the books with inflated sponsership deals the likes of Etihad Airways,Nik Puma and other named sponsers would have to have been involved and complied to this ! Tha chances of that are laughable. And as the guy explained despite Jordon's attempts to continually interrupt him, a quango commission of the Premier League would be completely out of its depths in trying to proof it and would be impossible to do so !Shortly
1. Explained the gravity of the whole case and possible consequences if we are fund guilty. Relegation at least, but much, much worse to expect. Basically a nuclear Armageddon compared to Everton and NF cases that are pure
skirmishes between two insignificant countries (my allegory)
2. According to his own experience dealing with similar cases, he does not see how EPL can prove anything
3. Was very specific, in spite of Jordan's butting in, that not assisting or being helpful to EPL in the whole process is not some grave offence and charge - there are 35 of those I think - that many journos and pundits very often quote, but they are a normal legal strategy in complicated litigations.
4. He touched on Everton as well (if you are interested :) ) and they should not be happy what he said. Sorry Evertonians.
Wasn't the lack of similar limitations affecting the PL, cited as one of the reasons UEFA's time barred evidence would finally be used to sink City?
HOWEVER, City had already submitted a defence response to the time barred accusations, but it was CAS who ruled it was all inadmissible because of time limitations.
This didn't stop they baying knuckle-draggers from claiming we'd got away with the UEFA charges on a time-barred technicality. \0/
I wonder if Stefan and Jordan had a chat off air
And yet... just listened to the "news" and they've clipped his quote so it says something like "this only ends one way - and that's in relegation".Absolutely. And it looks like Stefan had thought of that, as I know he's had a bit of stick in the past for talking about what might happen.
To me, he successfully turned around the seriousness of any punishment, to show just how serious the accusations are, how high the bar would be for the PL, and how unlikely they are to be able to prove anything.
Which was?1. Yes it was, doesn’t make it true. It has been argued otherwise.
2. Yes. Arguably making one above pretty much irrelevant.
3. Indeed.
All of which to me says it then can not be what you claimed earlier.
Will be available to listen later?
Only Johan Cruyff can do that.I wish Delaney would turn ... in his fucking grave.