PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules


giphy.gif
 
This all assumes that letters have been sent out. If they haven’t, he can pretty much read anything he likes out.
He can’t though. And I’m sure, as I said, that is what he what he will have been advised, assuming he’s asked the question.

I’d there’s no such letter and he reads a fictional one out then he’s in a world of pain and that is what I’m sure he’ll have been advised.

Based on the submitted accounts, this fictional character, unlike most of his cohort, has much to lose from being the subject of litigation.
 
The PL are hardly likely to say "Well actually, we've fucked up here and are trying to find a mutually acceptable way out" are they?

No more than City were ever likely to say "Despite all our protestations of innocence, we are bunch of lying cheats".

I've no doubt that the official line is that the hearing will still go ahead later this year. But I'm also in little doubt that the balance has significantly shifted in City's favour.
You could be right - but if this is the case then they are gonna have to own it at some point.

Whether that’s admitting now or in the Autumn after whatever hearing is now taking place.
 
He can’t though. And I’m sure, as I said, that is what he what he will have been advised, assuming he’s asked the question.

I’d there’s no such letter and he reads a fictional one out then he’s in a world of pain and that is what I’m sure he’ll have been advised.

Based on the submitted accounts, this fictional character, unlike most of his cohort, has much to lose from being the subject of litigation.
Not if he just says it was all for a laugh at the end and that there was never a letter.

His fans would love that he’d trolled City fans. He wouldn’t lose any subscribers.
 
We get guidance and warnings circulated all the time from our legal dept, everything from not identifying people in particular court cases, to copyright infringements to demanding retractions, amendments and yes, so-called 'cease and desist' warnings, though we do not use that particular phrase. Indeed, we have had three circulated today. I have just double-checked and we have not had any such notice circulated regarding City - and I'm guessing that we would have done.
 
You could be right - but if this is the case then they are gonna have to own it at some point.

Whether that’s admitting now or in the Autumn after whatever hearing is now taking place.
Absolutely. It could all change tomorrow or in the Autumn. How many times have we heard a government spokesman say "There are no plans to do x" then 48 hours later they tell us they're doing x.
 
If a ‘club source’ says it then it must be true!

*Deletes recent posting history…
For the record, I think it’s all nonsense and all it’s doing is giving us all something to chat about.

Brent doesn’t have a letter, the club source is probably Noel Gallagher on Radio X and nothing has changed in the past week.
 
Craig Burley on ESPN had a bit of rant about the 115 charges following a discussion around the title race. It was unusual for him and a little contrived or even scripted. The rant was aimed at the PL rather than City directly and he accused them of being hard on Forest and Everton, but kowtowing to City - and critical of the lack of action/time being taken since the allegations were laid. He seemed very careful not say anything directly anti-City and opened by saying this wasn’t about City and the current team.
Fwiw, I think the pushback from Keegan and Ziegler etc regarding the charges not being dropped and the hearing going ahead, is simply the PL trying to get back ahead of the curve to control the timing and narrative. I still think the hearing unlikely to go ahead and the matter to “resolve itself” well ahead of next season - maybe the Euros will be good timing for various announcements.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top