PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I like how this whole claim of the club having sat on the verdict for months having agreed to pet the PL save face and fond a successor, started off with - 'this is just my theory', went to 'I don't know this but I think that', and then when challenged as a theory went all 'well if you knew what I know' to now being all 'I've been told, and my source is bettet than your source, I trust it and am posting in good faith' crap.

Fuck, right, off! Just fucking admit you are trying to fake apparent legitimacy to an opinion you had once ages ago and move on ffs. Bet you yourself don't even know why you believe it any more, other than, you just do so everyone else has to as well.
 
Coatigan said:
I like how this whole claim of the club having sat on the verdict for months having agreed to pet the PL save face and fond a successor, started off with - 'this is just my theory', went to 'I don't know this but I think that', and then when challenged as a theory went all 'well if you knew what I know' to now being all 'I've been told, and my source is bettet than your source, I trust it and am posting in good faith' crap.

Fuck, right, off! Just fucking admit you are trying to fake apparent legitimacy to an opinion you had once ages ago and move on ffs. Bet you yourself don't even know why you believe it any more, other than, you just do so everyone else has to as well.
Click to expand...
The animosity is strong here and wholly misplaced. Please calm yourself.
 
slbsn said:
I think the parties could (but may well not) write to the panel and say:

1) due to football diary issues, the parties request that any decision is not released between x and y and, if finalised by the Panel, is held over to z at the earliest
2) both parties agree that they would, say, like to receive a draft decision for x days (say 7) for reading, minor changes etc before being handed down in final form. I'd expect the draft from the panel to look like a court draft headed in a similar way to this example I received recently:

IN CONFIDENCE​

This is a draft Decision sent to the parties to enable them to submit typing corrections and other obvious errors. This draft is confidential to the parties and their representatives and accordingly neither the draft itself nor its substance may be disclosed to any other person or used in the public domain. The parties must take all reasonable steps to ensure that its confidentiality is preserved. No action is to be taken (other than internally) in response to the draft before the Decision has been communicated to the parties in final form.


This feels possible. If the parties write in agreement, the panel is more likely to follow such requests.

But I don't see how once it is finalised and handed down ("communicated" to the parties or "published" to the parties) in final form, the PL rules demand release ("published" to the outside world) within a few days (as soon as practicable) and if they have had if for a week in draft (lets say), it would need to go the same day as being handed down in final form. Both parties are paranoid about leaks anyway so once they have the decision even in draft the clock is ticking.

The Everton and Forest cases didn't even give the parties very long to make comments - they had a few hours. Again because of leak paranoia.

Like Everton and Forest, it is absolutely possible that the decision is received in draft, handed down to the parties in final form and published to the world on the same day - I think it is unlikely with such a long document but it just will depend on the leak paranoia.

The one complexity here is if the first hearing is liability only ie Part 1, with a sanction hearing to follow, perhaps the parties could construe the PL rules to say no public release of the written decision is required until Part 2 is decided. I doubt it but not impossible. But obviously if there is to be no sanction hearing to follow this proviso wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...
I think the panel don't need a letter to remind them of their duties, they'll be well aware of what's going down.
 
Coatigan said:
I like how this whole claim of the club having sat on the verdict for months having agreed to pet the PL save face and fond a successor, started off with - 'this is just my theory', went to 'I don't know this but I think that', and then when challenged as a theory went all 'well if you knew what I know' to now being all 'I've been told, and my source is bettet than your source, I trust it and am posting in good faith' crap.

Fuck, right, off! Just fucking admit you are trying to fake apparent legitimacy to an opinion you had once ages ago and move on ffs. Bet you yourself don't even know why you believe it any more, other than, you just do so everyone else has to as well.
Click to expand...

You sounded like Simon Jordan “if City have irrefutable evidence they could have ended it in an instance.”

Personally I believe there’s a possibility that City will want to come out of this in a stronger position than it started & if that means diplomacy then I think they’ll do it.

Now it’s perfectly possible I’m wrong but I’m entitled to have a go.
 
cheekybids said:
You sounded like Simon Jordan “if City have irrefutable evidence they could have ended it in an instance.”

Personally I believe there’s a possibility that City will want to come out of this in a stronger position than it started & if that means diplomacy then I think they’ll do it.

Now it’s perfectly possible I’m wrong but I’m entitled to have a go.
Click to expand...
Of course you are. Zero issue with that, or anyone else having a theory. Can disagree, dispute, see something in it, agree, whatever.

But when you repeatedly try to impose that theory with 'sources telling you', then people will call it out.

johnny crossan said:
The animosity is strong here and wholly misplaced. Please calm yourself.
Click to expand...
I disagree, it is restrained given how much it has got on my tits, and for how long! But happy to ease off for the sake of the respect others seem to have for PB.
 
Coatigan said:
Of course you are. Zero issue with that, or anyone else having a theory. Can disagree, dispute, see something in it, agree, whatever.

But when you repeatedly try to impose that theory with 'sources telling you', then people will call it out.


I disagree, it is restrained given how much it has got on my tits, and for how long! But happy to ease off for the sake of the respect others seem to have for PB.
Click to expand...
But isn't that what Stefan is doing (no disrespect meant to him)?

For the record I have no clue which is closer to the truth but accept that both have been "told something" and are only posting in good faith.
 
I haven't got a fucking clue when the verdict will be announced.
Now if everyone else could admit the same then we can sit back and wait peacefully.
Alternatively, it's all to do with the new regulator even though he/she will be looking at the top five (?) tiers not just the Prem.
 
Is it possible that both are right?

1. Khaldoon was given the nod months ago that we would come out of this well - That isnt a sight of the formal written up judgement, just a verbal update from someone close to the case and trusted. (Colin)
2. The written judgement hasn't yet been received. (Stefan)

I wish these two would have a conversation over a glass of red wine and share their thoughts in an attempt to get to a mutual position - they are both respected and valued members of this community. That would at least stop this thread growing at 40 odd pages a day. Or maybe events will overtake that anyway.

or I am being naive?
 
Centurions said:
But isn't that what Stefan is doing (no disrespect meant to him)?

For the record I have no clue which is closer to the truth but accept that both have been "told something" and are only posting in good faith.
Click to expand...
I think it’s perfectly possible that two different sources have given different information. This is the problem with rumours, you don’t know the question that was asked or if the answer has been misinterpreted. Additionally Stefan’s source’s source might be doubling down on preventing leaks, although personally I don’t see how delaying the result for so long would be practical, surely it would also need agreement with the 3rd party businesses and individuals who have been implicated in wrongdoing too.
 
SouthStandStander said:
I remember back to Easter when we had that imminent imminent week. When I posted the "it's happening" gif. Really thinking that it was.
Fuck that was a long time ago now
Click to expand...
Weasels gotta weasel……no doubt the delay is all about the PL trying to show they’ve got their house in order and they’re not the shambolic organisation we all know them to be…..before the announcement
 
Centurions said:
But isn't that what Stefan is doing (no disrespect meant to him)?

For the record I have no clue which is closer to the truth but accept that both have been "told something" and are only posting in good faith.
Click to expand...

But with a complete absence of information from anyone else including our darlings in the media, doesn't that back up Stefan's position that it's extremely likely that we don't know? It seems much more reasonable than people on both sides knowing for months and seemingly only leaking it to PB?
 
Don’t worry lads, we can always use the delorean to go back and change the course of history if it all goes tits up.


-:)
 
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