PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Guessing Tolmie's tweet/post was due to the breaking news (at the time) on the APT stuff.

Don't think there's anything of relevance to this, although cryptic posts don't help here imo.

Not sure why Tolmie would tweet re the APT announcement today! Think this tweet relates to something else. Hopefully positive from the tone.
 
It's almost inevitable that it won't be a binary Guilty or Not Guilty. It will be a spectrum of judgments eg Etihad, Aabar sponsorships are cleared, ie all questions answered. Worst case scenario, the contested Etisalat £30m payment could be ruled as acting in bad faith, in one FY only. Hopefully all other Etisalat payments are completely cleared, there is nothing else about Etisalat that is contentious and in the public domain. If Mancini is considered as not time barred and he didn't set foot in Abu Dhabi in one specific FY, then once again that could be ruled bad faith, in one FY. The non cooperation charges can only lead to non sporting sanctions, so bollocks to them. It terns of severity of possible sporting sanction, I've always considered the weighing to be something like:-
Etihad 80% (£600m 10 year deal)
Etisalat 5%
Aabar 5%
Mancini 5%
Toure/Fordham 5%
Non cooperation 0%
Mancini didn’t have to step foot in AD to fulfil his company’s contract

He could’ve sent anybody he deemed capable & qualified (or potentially delivered remotely)

The Mancini part is the biggest load of shite in all of it
 

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.