PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Given that Everton and Forrest both appealed and Leicester won their appeal, and many outlets expect us to appeal when discussing timescales, we cam safely say that stefan was wrong with his certainty on that one.

Not sure he was wrong.

I think he said an appeal may be successful on a matter of judgment (ie the level of sanction as in the two Everton cases and the Forest case) but was unlikely to be successful on a matter of fact (such as jurisdiction, like the Leicester case).

Which is why everyone was surprised by the Leicester appeal verdict, and some disappointed :) So I guess there is a little hope, and there isn't much downside to launching an appeal. You don't have to ask leave to appeal either, I think, so it's a good way of tying the PL up for another 3 months .....
 
Was Stefan's point that we couldn't appeal to someone else eg CAS or a proper court. It all has to be done via the Premier League

Started off with that, but no it extended to no appeals.

I think we should move on from that and accept appeals Are possible and stop parroting 'stefan said' on that one and go with what has since happened.
 
Start date is September 16th, expected to last 10-12 weeks, that puts the end date end of November/December. Another month or 6 weeks to reach and write a judgment puts the announcement around new years. Even give them an extra month or 2 and we’re talking about end of Feb.

Stefans been fairly certain there’ll be no appeal likely because of the rules, so I can’t see a situation where the table in April is relevant. If we lose the punishment will be so severe that we’re instantly out of any title race regardless of an appeal, if we win then obviously it’s not an issue.
 
Another hatchet job by Sky Sports, big article about the charges, heavily slanted to assuming we are guilty. Nothing whatsoever mentioned about what if we are innocent.
When we get cleared the media will be in a state of disarray and totally unprepared about what to broadcast as this scenario (1 of 3 potential outcomes: cleared of everything, guilty of some, guilty of all) has not even entered their heads. I need to get a big bag of popcorn in for that day.
 
Not sure he was wrong.

I think he said an appeal may be successful on a matter of judgment (ie the level of sanction as in the two Everton cases and the Forest case) but was unlikely to be successful on a matter of fact (such as jurisdiction, like the Leicester case).

Which is why everyone was surprised by the Leicester appeal verdict, and some disappointed :) So I guess there is a little hope, and there isn't much downside to launching an appeal. You don't have to ask leave to appeal either, I think, so it's a good way of tying the PL up for another 3 months .....

I remember the discussion well. But put that aside, either way then the oeople that repeat what they think he said then got their understanding wrong, which still makes it wrong now.

My issue has never been with what he said or him being wrong. My issue is the many who still hang onto it, as if it is an absolute fact. When it is clear appeals do happen, and we would have the roght to one. If we were to lose.
 
Not sure he was wrong.

I think he said an appeal may be successful on a matter of judgment (ie the level of sanction as in the two Everton cases and the Forest case) but was unlikely to be successful on a matter of fact (such as jurisdiction, like the Leicester case).

Which is why everyone was surprised by the Leicester appeal verdict, and some disappointed :) So I guess there is a little hope, and there isn't much downside to launching an appeal. You don't have to ask leave to appeal either, I think, so it's a good way of tying the PL up for another 3 months .....
and this is where people are getting confused with the whole thing, the numbers were there where everton and forest were concerned, they were factual, everton and forest had admitted it and the appeal was them saying that there were mitigating circumstances to the fact so they were appealing the sanctions based on the mitigating circumstances not the actual facts themselves.

The difference with us and where people are getting it confused because the press keep lumping us in with the everton, forest and leicester cases and that we have denied everything, we have not said your facts are correct but there is reasons why, we have said you are completely wrong, what you are saying is not true and heres why, now if they prove what they are saying is true then we could not appeal that but they have to pray their assertions are true first while discounting our evidence to say they are not and thats what stefan is getting at.
 
Started off with that, but no it extended to no appeals.

I think we should move on from that and accept appeals Are possible and stop parroting 'stefan said' on that one and go with what has since happened.
This is complete nonsense. You have simply misunderstood. Please don’t misquote me. I’ve been very clear how and who can appeal and to where.
 
Start date is September 16th, expected to last 10-12 weeks, that puts the end date end of November/December. Another month or 6 weeks to reach and write a judgment puts the announcement around new years. Even give them an extra month or 2 and we’re talking about end of Feb.

Stefans been fairly certain there’ll be no appeal likely because of the rules, so I can’t see a situation where the table in April is relevant. If we lose the punishment will be so severe that we’re instantly out of any title race regardless of an appeal, if we win then obviously it’s not an issue.
On the contrary. I’m certain City will appeal if they lose. It is arbitration (APT) which is almost impossible to appeal.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.