PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Bloominmarvellous]

I think the point is even if it doesn't cover the time period in question the repetitional risk more generally is not something Eithad would risk.

I agree, that was the point I was trying to say as showing it in the books although not in that period adds evidence to any argument.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Before I ask for your autograph, quick question I’ve been wanting to ask, do you get hard and wet when you come here and argue for the sake of arguing?

Imagine the feeling of self-righteous magnanimity though.

Hello King Charles - is your brother a paedo?
But Sir Alex - did you not outspend everyone when you had a monopoly?
Tony - aren't you a war criminal?
Mr Patton - you're really saying you knew nothing about the Savile debacle under your trust stewardship?

All for balance as long as it's er.....balanced.

Owl in a Jar thought she was being edgy, but it was just poor journalism - more so given the free rides that bbc NW usually give on its lightweight show.

Before we go down the - "but it's only Annabel Tiffin" track - yep, but the critical, loaded, bias based presenting - is a free hit to an audience of approximately 650,000.

 

[MadchesterCity]

No it doesn't.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Which if you read my previous posts on it, I already point out is a basic cheap shot. Nevertheless one that is there and people will take. As it is hypocritical too, hence the glass houses comments are equally there to make.

Fair enough. I thought it better not to get too involved in all that nonsense.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

The irony of the poster you replied to isn’t lost on me. He’s responsible for about 2408 of the pages in this thread!

 

[Coatigan]

Before I ask for your autograph, quick question I’ve been wanting to ask, do you get hard and wet when you come here and argue for the sake of arguing?

I get that that happens and people argue for the sake of arguing here. But people do also do it in good faith too, and it is the sheer volume that makes it cyclical and repetative. Many of us probably had this at times where a basic point became laboured, and have probably had such remarks made too. There were 2 basic points among it all, was there any proof, and was it relevant. Proof has been added, opinions on relevance stated. Think it is probably time to move past it.

 

[Eoiyflem]

Serious jawline on that woman - Desperate Dan-nabel

 

[Spanishbob]

Well what a waste of 10 mins on here.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

I get that that happens and people argue for the sake of arguing here. But people do also do it in good faith too, and it is the sheer volume that makes it cyclical and repetative. Many of us probably had this at times where a basic point became laboured, and have probably had such remarks made too. There were 2 basic points among it all, was there any proof, and was it relevant. Proof has been added, opinions on relevance stated. Think it is probably time to move past it.

I'd add context and consistency - but as you say - move on.

 

[halfcenturyup]

The irony of the poster you replied to isn’t lost on me. He’s responsible for about 2408 of the pages in this thread!

You counted them. How sweet.

You could address me directly next time you want to take a shot. "The poster you replied to". Jesus.