PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

LeonardoDaVnci said:
Since 115:day, there's been a number of developments that many us believe reinforces the super confident stance of the City execs...

The continued development of the £350m North Stand (btw it's starting to look awesome)

The £10m training complex solely for womens/girls teams has now started.

Etihad Airways revenues (it's ALL about Etihad) have grown steadily since COVID, thanks in so small part by association with the best team in the world.

2021 $3.1b
2022 $4.1b
2023 $6.0b
2024 $6.4b projected

The ongoing prep for an IPO for Ethihad, the first ever for a middle East airline.

The rebranding of the academy stadium by new commercial partners Joie.

The full list of partners remains as impressive as ever, and includes those added since 115 day

Man City's Global and Regional Partners | Manchester City F. C.

We’re grateful for the support of our partners, who make a vital contribution to the Club.
www.mancity.com www.mancity.com

New investors (£200m +) in CFG and just recently in NYCFC.

Would catweazle really have enployed Berrada if he believed he was about to be proven complicit in the 115 charges.

Though never really mentioned in the MSM there.must have been some Case Management Hearings before the Final Hearing, now in progress. They must have gone really well.

The MSM blackout on the ATP case, almost inevitably means we've had some significant success, now believed to be subject to a PL appeal.

LCFC victory shows when the PL are desperate they resort to accusations of not acting in good faith, but they failed miserably on this.

To be continued..
Click to expand...
Its a good sign the club seems confident of their innocence and no wrongdoing but it the end of the day its not them who gives the verdict. In this hearing it doesnt really matter if we are guilty or not. What matters is how this "independent" three man panel interpret the "evidence" and if they believe we are guilty or not. Even if it was the case that most of all legal experts on this matter would consider the "evidence" in this hearing as insufficient there will always be some thats of a different opinion since its rarely completely black or white with no if, buts and maybes. What the opinion of the Arsenal fan and the others in this three man panel will be, only time will tell.

Call me a cynic, but everyone wants us to lose and it wouldn't be the first time the pressure of public opinion had an impact on the verdict in a legal case.

Regardless of this three man panels credentials I believe we'll have an unbiased and fair verdict when I see it.
 
Cobwebcat said:
@slbsn What do you think of the rumour that the PL offered City a six point deduction to settle?

Now let’s assume the above is true. Given that City think they have a strong case but that you are never sure of an outcome, would that be an offer worth consideration in your opinion?

All hypothetical.
Click to expand...
The guilty crew would have a field day, personally i think we need to take this all the way if we’re convinced we’ve done nothing wrong and put it to bed once and for all.
 


Tangential I know but here's top twat/Harris showing he might not be as bright as he thinks he is.

Lots of Arsenal goons making similar points.

The amount of time the ball is in play obviously has no bearing on the amount of injury time there js. The ball is in play for longer as a result of there being more injury time...I hope his analysis of the charges is equally flawed!
 
jaiguruKun said:


Tangential I know but here's top twat/Harris showing he might not be as bright as he thinks he is.

Lots of Arsenal goons making similar points.

The amount of time the ball is in play obviously has no bearing on the amount of injury time there js. The ball is in play for longer as a result of there being more injury time...I hope his analysis of the charges is equally flawed!
Click to expand...

Does that 35 mins include the injury time? In which case it was 35 mins out of a total of 54/55 mins, so not such a good figure after all
 
jaiguruKun said:


Tangential I know but here's top twat/Harris showing he might not be as bright as he thinks he is.

Lots of Arsenal goons making similar points.

The amount of time the ball is in play obviously has no bearing on the amount of injury time there js. The ball is in play for longer as a result of there being more injury time...I hope his analysis of the charges is equally flawed!
Click to expand...

Daft ****, lucky it wasn't 10 minutes!
 
jaiguruKun said:


Tangential I know but here's top twat/Harris showing he might not be as bright as he thinks he is.

Lots of Arsenal goons making similar points.

The amount of time the ball is in play obviously has no bearing on the amount of injury time there js. The ball is in play for longer as a result of there being more injury time...I hope his analysis of the charges is equally flawed!
Click to expand...

Only a complete moron can see a team waste time at every opportunity all game and then be surprised when there is time added on.
 
jaiguruKun said:


Tangential I know but here's top twat/Harris showing he might not be as bright as he thinks he is.

Lots of Arsenal goons making similar points.

The amount of time the ball is in play obviously has no bearing on the amount of injury time there js. The ball is in play for longer as a result of there being more injury time...I hope his analysis of the charges is equally flawed!
Click to expand...

The ball was in play for as long as it was because we quickly restarted at every opportunity - unsurprising since we were behind.
Injury time takes account of tarquins falling down at every opportunity claiming injury/cramp.
The 99th minute was literally down to a tarquin going down with cramp for 2 minutes during injury time - so their own feckin fault. If they'd got on with it just maybe they'd have hung on.
Got MORE than they deserved didn't they!!!
 
WesthoughtonJohn said:
The ball was in play for as long as it was because we quickly restarted at every opportunity - unsurprising since we were behind.
Injury time takes account of tarquins falling down at every opportunity claiming injury/cramp.
The 99th minute was literally down to a tarquin going down with cramp for 2 minutes during injury time - so their own feckin fault. If they'd got on with it just maybe they'd have hung on.
Got MORE than they deserved didn't they!!!
Click to expand...
Even Oliver was embarrassed by their timewasting.
 
Cobwebcat said:
@slbsn What do you think of the rumour that the PL offered City a six point deduction to settle?

Now let’s assume the above is true. Given that City think they have a strong case but that you are never sure of an outcome, would that be an offer worth consideration in your opinion?

All hypothetical.
Click to expand...
IF that was true, does it not basically put to bed all the scaremongering surrounding what will happen if City were to lose the battle?

Why would the PL offer a measly 6 point deduction if they know they can take us to the cleaners in court
 
chris85mcfc said:
IF that was true, does it not basically put to bed all the scaremongering surrounding what will happen if City were to lose the battle?

Why would the PL offer a measly 6 point deduction if they know they can take us to the cleaners in court
Click to expand...

I can't see it being 6 points. The optics of a settlement would have been bad enough without the punishment then being less than Everton. Remember this is a world where Everyone got 10pts (initially) for one charge and we have 115 of them. The public interest means it's unlikely the PL would offer such a deal.

It's also the fact that we would then be determined to be guilty and possibly would have had to issue a statement accordingly. Every City fan has to be optimistic on the basis that we refused to take a settlement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bez
supercity88 said:
I can't see it being 6 points. The optics of a settlement would have been bad enough without the punishment then being less than Everton. Remember this is a world where Everyone got 10pts (initially) for one charge and we have 115 of them. The public interest means it's unlikely the PL would offer such a deal.

It's also the fact that we would then be determined to be guilty and possibly would have had to issue a statement accordingly. Every City fan has to be optimistic on the basis that we refused to take a settlement.
Click to expand...
Yeah, your 2nd paragraph is what I was getting at, in that if we thought we'd be found guilty, then we'd likely accept that settlement knowing that we would be found guilty anyway.

It would seem a monumentally stupid decision, to stick your fingers in your ears and hope that you'd manage to come out successful.

I think we knew the probabilities prior to the case, and are clearly more than confident that we can come out with a better outcome than the original settlement, assuming there actually was one.
 
Remember this is a world where Everton got 10pts (initially) for one charge and we have 115 of them.


Sure I read somewhere that Everton's was multiple charges (like Forest) but the press just reported them as one so ours looked worse.

Anyone confirm this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top