They can be under pressure etc but nobody goes with a case like this where the advice is that the case is weak. Because in the end, in such a case, they are very likely to lose and that has consequences in itself. So I really don’t see it. This should be distinguished from the PR and the breadth of the charges where there is a tactical decision in play.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Surely our assumed guilt had some part to play in the PL decision ? If the case was dropped then the damage or perceived damage would be great as would the the damage from perhaps people thinking they could get away with stuff.Isn’t it possible that the Premier League faced (faces) an existential threat which clouded their judgement? In their opinion (based on them seeking approval from Rags and Dippers for senior appointments) they are nothing without the old top 4. If they didn’t bring the charges maybe some Premier League clubs were threatening to leave? Perhaps they felt compelled to bring the action otherwise, no Premier League. In this situation maybe they did go against legal advice.
Btw Keith Moon liked your post. Go and get fucking showered.
Having said that I think if that is true the Premier League messed up here.
If we are innocent they look really incompetent. They have driven directly or indirectly the they must have done something wrong.
If we have indeed done something wrong according to the panel then appeals and claims for damages plus the questions of how did we get away with it for so long will do so much damage to the Premier League
I think the Premier League bosses are surprisingly insular. I suspect they think that what’s said on RAWk and Rag Cafe by fans in Surey etc is indicative of the wider PL audience in India etc i.e the cheating xxxxxx I bet fans of all clubs in the Premier League don’t know much about any of this and don’t much care.
I wonder if the League ever really got the chance to drop it.
It wanted to do its own investigation and complete it after CAS only had half a picture maybe like with UEFA eel held stuff back for the panel only. Perhaps they knew they where on shaky ground but had to carry on perhaps it was part of the plan to damage the PL management the red cartel and bringing proper regs
Before Feb 2023, the PL had at least the gist of the unequivocal witness evidence at CAS. It is near certain that in correspondence City would have set out its case firmly as to why the PL should not proceed to charge. This would have included annexures of key documents from the documents disclosed in the investigation phase. I suspect City also shared the CAS expert evidence and the CAS witness statements.To be clear on what you are saying because I think I must misunderstand it.
You are saying the PL would have been given access to the club's compelling or "irrefutable" evidence before February 2023? I would imagine the most compelling elements of counter-evidence are the witness statements from Mansour, Khaldoon, Pearce and various sponsor executives as well as accounting analysis from the books of ADUG and Etihad, as at CAS. Surely you don't mean that the PL has had access to all that before they referred their allegations to the disciplinary process?
If they had, then my point is, indeed, silly and I'll hold my hands up in that case.
Your other points I can address later, once I understand your position better.
There is no way the PL charged blindly without extensive pre-issue correspondence. Of course, over time the parties refine their case and the parties see that in the openings, the trial itself and then in closings. But the “charging decision” would obviously not be taken in a vacuum.
But even if you are right, if the picture changes during a formal disclosure/pre-hearing process such that the evidence no longer supports the claimants case, they’d be crazy to ignore the advice and plough on regardless. Like it or not, the PL will have gone into the hearing believing they would prove their case.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,561
See you back on here in 2026 then. ;)
Just after the Altrincham game :)
No just another one for the list - can’t be specific on that oneHi @slbsn - I may have missed it, but if you're willing and able to, could you elaborate on that 'soft signal' of positivity.
We may as well start the morning with a hint of good news, today is one of those now dreaded things known to other fans as 'match days'...
Etihad Airway are heading for annual record profits, which adds strength to our other 'issue' with the PL re APTs and renewal of the sponsorship
We haven’t and never in the context of claim of this typeStefan what makes you say the PL wouldn’t act against their lawyers advice when we’ve seen then them act against their advice on other occasions.
I don’t see the point in living in a delusion that the PL have just pursued a case to the ends of the earth that they know they will lose and spent 10s of millions doing that. It’s simply not realistic. They obviously think they have a belief they can win before the hearing. Now it’s complete, that is much less clear because it May now be obvious they failed - in fact City’s confidence is thatSounds a bit worrying & few positives here Stefan. We must also have great belief to take it this far - what are our main definite “wins”
Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
Rightly or wrongly I always take your posts as highly likely to be correct. A piece of this complex puzzles framework if you like.Before Feb 2023, the PL had at least the gist of the unequivocal witness evidence at CAS. It is near certain that in correspondence City would have set out its case firmly as to why the PL should not proceed to charge. This would have included annexures of key documents from the documents disclosed in the investigation phase. I suspect City also shared the CAS expert evidence and the CAS witness statements.
There is no way the PL charged blindly without extensive pre-issue correspondence. Of course, over time the parties refine their case and the parties see that in the openings, the trial itself and then in closings. But the “charging decision” would obviously not be taken in a vacuum.
But even if you are right, if the picture changes during a formal disclosure/pre-hearing process such that the evidence no longer supports the claimants case, they’d be crazy to ignore the advice and plough on regardless. Like it or not, the PL will have gone into the hearing believing they would prove their case.
And whilst I have no reason to disagree with this assessment, the PL aren’t infallible. The Leicester case being the prime example. The PL presumably had legal advice there too.
All I’m saying is I think it entirely feasible that the PL case could include some cock ups albeit of a different nature.
At least I hope so.
cheekybids
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 10,977
We haven’t and never in the context of claim of this type
The APT case showed they ignored their own lawyers, of course it’s not a claim of this type but they ignored it all the same.
I’d expect them to be told the case was arguable but it’s not 50/50 is it?
Thanks. But the Leicester case is not a good example. The lawyer’s advice in that case was that the PL were correct but they lost - the advice was not that they would lose but they carried on regardless. In fact, on Leicester, the PL were amazed they lost given the advice.Rightly or wrongly I always take your posts as highly likely to be correct. A piece of this complex puzzles framework if you like.
And whilst I have no reason to disagree with this assessment, the PL aren’t infallible. The Leicester case being the prime example. The PL presumably had legal advice there too.
All I’m saying is I think it entirely feasible that the PL case could include some cock ups albeit of a different nature.
At least I hope so.
Of course, the whole City case could be a huge cock up or a purely vindictive pursuit of a case the PL knew with near certainty they would lose. But, take a step back - that is obviously very unlikely.