PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I don't understand what the hold up is here any longer.
There's no way they can still be deliberating or writing up the findings/result, or whatever they do.

If the Premier League were sitting on it and waiting to after the season to announce it then they should have done so by now, in a quiet period and also when City's staff are out of the country.
They'd hardly want to wait to the eve of the new season to announce.

A total shit show.

First of all we were told the earlier it comes out in the new year the better it is for City.
Then it would be the February international break
Then March (think Pep said this himself)
Then Easter
Then the summer after the season ends
 
Mcfc1.9.8.0 said:
I get there’s no news and it’s ok to post what people may or may not think will happen and have a debate about it.

But to be chatting about stuff that has nothing whatsoever to do so ever about the charges the mods ain’t doing their job simple as that

You wouldn’t need to delete 100,000 posts if those stupid topics in the thread were nipped in the bud as soon as they started

If there’s no news let the thread drop down the forum until there is news
Click to expand...
A weeks thread ban for repeat offenders would quickly resolve it.
 
thegoatsthegoat said:
The best part is somebody may post a thread about something weird and wonderful and a mod will merge it with a thread from about 15 years ago that may be tediously linked to it. Yet it is a free for all here.
Click to expand...
There's still the odd bit of good related stuff posted, but the majority content is just bilge now.
 
Damocles said:
The fact you think this qualifies you to discount the belief systems of the entire human race, something independently invented by every single culture in the entire world, is just the absolute peak of arrogance.

Spirituality is part of neurology, for the record. Religious feelings are built into the biology of every human being at a fundamental level which is probably why almost every single human being in history, from untouched Amazonian tribes to proto-civilizations in the Indus Valley region, for the 12,000 years of human settlements before around 1900 believed in some sort of spirituality.

And you weighed up the evidence? Can you explain what you believe the energy levels of higher dimensional spacetime are please? What's your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses of abiogenesis from the conclusions of Miller-Urey? What's the key to the logarithmic sized gaps between the SM and Planck sizes? Doesn't that seem incomplete to you?

Whilst I'm not exactly religion's best friend, don't pretend that your answer for whether a creator exists lies in the realms of evidence and science.
Click to expand...
If religious feelings are hard-wired into biology, why has religious thought evolved rapidly over time. The renaissance and the emergence of the scientific method significantly changed ideology.

You ask for explanations of certain scientific problems knowing that there are gaps in scientific knowledge but the lack of understanding of the natural world is not an argument against scientific enquiry rather it is a justification for it. If you want to understand abiogenesis, then you need to undertake scientific study of the natural world such as solar system sample return missions and study the fossil record. All that we have learned of the natural world has come through the scientific method. Many scientists were religious, for example Kepler, Newton and Galileo but they were a product of human culture.

There are many religious accounts of the evolution of this planet. I don't believe any of them but I know that the origins of the Earth are known precisely from radioactive age-dating of Calcium Aluminium rich inclusions in primitive meteorites (4.567 billion years ago).

When I walk in a forest, or look out to sea, or look at the stars, I may feel wonder or love. It is the basis for poetry, music, the arts. That is not the same thing as religious belief.
 
Last edited:
IrishBlueSince92 said:
I don't understand what the hold up is here any longer.
There's no way they can still be deliberating or writing up the findings/result, or whatever they do.

If the Premier League were sitting on it and waiting to after the season to announce it then they should have done so by now, in a quiet period and also when City's staff are out of the country.
They'd hardly want to wait to the eve of the new season to announce.

A total shit show.

First of all we were told the earlier it comes out in the new year the better it is for City.
Then it would be the February international break
Then March (think Pep said this himself)
Then Easter
Then the summer after the season ends
Click to expand...
Premier league made very serious allegations against the club, the ruling will have to be watertight.
Probably fallout from the ruling is making it drag on
 
IrishBlueSince92 said:
I don't understand what the hold up is here any longer.
There's no way they can still be deliberating or writing up the findings/result, or whatever they do.

If the Premier League were sitting on it and waiting to after the season to announce it then they should have done so by now, in a quiet period and also when City's staff are out of the country.
They'd hardly want to wait to the eve of the new season to announce.

A total shit show.

First of all we were told the earlier it comes out in the new year the better it is for City.
Then it would be the February international break
Then March (think Pep said this himself)
Then Easter
Then the summer after the season ends
Click to expand...
Likely they've agreed a date to release the decision, provides both parties to work a post-judgement strategy.
 
Marvin. said:
If religious feelings are hard-wired into biology, why has religious thought evolved rapidly over time. The renaissance and the emergence of the scientific method significantly changed ideology.
Click to expand...

You're conflating religious feelings (i.e. spirituality) with religious dogma (i.e. beliefs). Only the first bit is biological.

You ask for explanations of certain scientific problems knowing that there are gaps in scientific knowledge but the lack of understanding of the natural world is not an argument against scientific enquiry rather it is a justification for it.
Click to expand...

No, the idea wasn't to point to gaps in scientific knowledge, it was point out that when someone says "well I've weighed up the evidence", usually when they ask them they seem to have very little idea of the complexities.

I know that the origins of the Earth are known precisely from radioactive age-dating of Calcium Aluminium rich inclusions in primitive meteorites (4.567 billion years ago).
Click to expand...

And that's wrong which is sort of my point. The Earth is a minimum age of 4.49 billion years which is a different thing. Not only is there a margin of error, but generally when scientists date things they're pretty careful in stating that's the new minimum rather than exact. Because tomorrow if they find a 4.8 billion year old rock then that becomes the new minimum.

My overall point here isn't about ages of the Earth, it's about the complete dismissal of what has been a major part of life for almost every human being who has ever lived because they misunderstand what the Big Bang says or whatever. Or they target one religion and interpretation of it like saying "well it wasn't made in 6 days therefore..." and dismissing the entire notion of spiritual thought based on it. It's close minded at best.

And ultimately, proclaiming yourself as "knowing" that everybody else's beliefs are completely fake and invented and you KNOW the truth makes you sound a ****.
 
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