As my auld granny used to say.
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we start to deceive."
My thoughts are that there are so many differing clubs, people and organisations hell bent on cutting City off at the knees that there will be something. And Citys legal people will know what it is and where it is.
Or I could be wrong;-)
Its not whether there is or not, its drip feeding the idea that there could be, just like we have been drip fed the idea that we are guilty we are doing the same in reverse, theres not going to be a smoking gun but there doesnt have to be, its about sowing the seeds of doubt, just like our emails without context can look incriminating, the same can be done with theirs, a misplaced word here, a snide dig there, allied that to a public meeting in new york, toss in a widely reported meeting between masters and the red tops and you start to sew the seeds of doubt, its how city do things we see death by a thousand passes on the pitch and now you're seeing it off it to.Just trying to be realistic.
As I've said, I'd be amazed if there is anything incriminating in their official emails and correspondance.
Just as there is nothing incriminating in ours.
Masters mistake was taking the job and becoming a patsy for the red top, he never had anything about him to do this job.Let's not forget, when people think they are untouchable they make mistakes. I wouldn't put it past people like Gill and Parry to put down in writing to the PL things they shouldn't.
And Masters is not an impressive man. Put him under increasing pressure and watch him break. He will make mistakes as the end-game gets closer, I am sure.
Always assumed he was under the table in that photo.Levy was the waiter :)
But can we use it if it’s hacked?True, but then they better make sure they don't delete/lose/spirit away any correspondence that the club already has in it's possession (through one means or another ....). It's a high-risk game to play when you don't know what the other side already has.
Your opinions are allowed? You’ve posted said opinions about 40 times. People disagreeing with you is also allowed and muting me doesn’t change that fact.Remembered why I muted you in the first place.
No differing of opinions allowed.
There's being optimistic and then there's thinking these emails, which are just standard disclosure, will end the 115 charges etc.
I think that's true. Pep would have walked away and so would our Auditors, other sponsors, and other senior partners. Silver Lake would not have invested in CFG either and the City Council would have stopped its partnership with Sheikh Mansour.I think the club knows all too well who, and what clubs have been out to see our progress halted. I also believe that in order to make Pep continue (as he has) and be at ease with the whole situation that our club will have made him privvy to what evidence they have.
Of course, i may be wrong. But I just feel that if our owners etc were doing what they were accused of, then Pep surely would have walked a long time ago
Maybe not.But can we use it if it’s hacked?
Given that all of this started with hacked emails my guess would be yes. Imagine the uproar on here if hacked PL league messages were not allowed to be used in our defenceBut can we use it if it’s hacked?