PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

mancboy said:
The likelihood is that it will be on the none co-operation charges as these are the hardest to argue as they are subjective rather than finite and i believe thats why they were added, the legal team of the pl knew they didnt have a prayer of making the main stuff stick so they added a load of other fluff on so the whole thing didnt look as ridiculous as it plainly is.
Click to expand...

i tend to think that anything that is hard to argue due to being subjective should be hardest to find guilty on.
unless there are some clear points to be made, in which case it's not hard to argue.
( maybe my phrasing is suspect though )
 
Lord Blue said:
i tend to think that anything that is hard to argue due to being subjective should be hardest to find guilty on.
unless there are some clear points to be made, in which case it's not hard to argue.
( maybe my phrasing is suspect though )
Click to expand...
i see your point but the reverse could also be true in that if its black and white its either guilty or not and therefore not open to interpretation, however when its subjective then its easier to find guilty on (im thinking of the CAS ruling) even tho its bullshit and spurious at best.
 
jamielowndes said:
Always said the same. They knew what was coming between PSG and City and tried to lower the shutter. Unfortunately City slid under just in time.

It's never been about protecting smaller clubs from themselves or even parity. They just wanted a glass ceiling.
Click to expand...

i think you're wrong on that. I believe it to be a drawbridge that they tried to lift up but we got over it just in time.

time will tell i reckon.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Not Chelsea, according to Swiss Ramble.
Click to expand...
Not actually what SR's numbers say. Or mine. They will fail unless they have a £150m non-football intra group transfer (Women's team or property). I think Keiran does mean Chelsea but I'm inclined to think they have played the game well on permitted intra group transfers to balance the PSR position. Certainly at the operating line they will lose over £200m again
 
mancboy said:
i see your point but the reverse could also be true in that if its black and white its either guilty or not and therefore not open to interpretation, however when its subjective then its easier to find guilty on (im thinking of the CAS ruling) even tho its bullshit and spurious at best.
Click to expand...
i think it might fall in line with the majority ruling. if we're cleared of the other charges i think non cooperation will be harder for them to argue. and vice versa.
 
slbsn said:
Not actually what SR's numbers say. Or mine. They will fail unless they have a £150m non-football intra group transfer (Women's team or property). I think Keiran does mean Chelsea but I'm inclined to think they have played the game well on permitted intra group transfers to balance the PSR position. Certainly at the operating line they will lose over £200m again
Click to expand...
Listened to your TS segment earlier. You mentioned that City were confident but I wasn’t clear what Simon was saying. Was he saying the PL are confident? Because he then went on to speak about challenges but I wasn’t clear by who?
 
blue ranger said:
Listened to your TS segment earlier. You mentioned that City were confident but I wasn’t clear what Simon was saying. Was he saying the PL are confident? Because he then went on to speak about challenges but I wasn’t clear by who?
Click to expand...
Simon appears to disagree City are confident
 
Lord Blue said:
i think it might fall in line with the majority ruling. if we're cleared of the other charges i think non cooperation will be harder for them to argue. and vice versa.
Click to expand...
Just a thought, but if we are found not guilty of the charges doesn't that mean we are almost certain to be found guilty of non co-operation, as the non guilty verdict will be based on information we didn't previously provide to the PL when they were doing their initial investigation?

Either that or the PL have come to completely the wrong conclusion on the facts when arriving at their decision to charge us ...... which cold also be true.
 
dan136 said:
Just a thought, but if we are found not guilty of the charges doesn't that mean we are almost certain to be found guilty of non co-operation, as the non guilty verdict will be based on information we didn't previously provide to the PL when they were doing their initial investigation?

Either that or the PL have come to completely the wrong conclusion on the facts when arriving at their decision to charge us ...... which cold also be true.
Click to expand...

i think that would make it harder for them as we will say that we said all along that our books were accurate and the PL have just wasted our time and money
 
blue for life said:
Just listened to Stefan on Talkshite. Bit about the 115 at the end. Jordan is dying for us to get found guilty. He says we have a case to answer but doesn’t expand on that. Calls us state owned again but doesn’t get picked up on that.
Click to expand...
lol ffs case to answer?
dear simon fucking jordon ,
if you are reading this , how about you insert a long stick inside your anus hole and flip it upside down and call it “case to prove?” instead
 
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