PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Could it be revealed this international week.
Have the club already done a deal not to win the league for 2 years?
Might explain why we've gone to pot over the last 10 months.
Yea and we've spent millions on new players to make certain we don't win the league!
 
After the legal beagles have come back from their summer holidays (sensible answer) and it’s the lead up to the Derby (for the conspiracy theorists), would be my guess.

Or @slbsn has just done a @Prestwich_Blue and just thrown a random prediction out there because he’s bored.

Or maybe @slbsn has followed @Prestwich_Blue by making a prediction based on something they heard from someone they trusted. Just a thought.

Very un-lawyer like behaviour to just make a prediction based on nothing at all, imho.
 
My optimism on the charges somehow goes up and down in conjunction with the team's performances.
If the judgement was announced today i feel it would be another kick in the balls.

Illogical - I know
 
Very much agree with only considering feet when VAR looks at offside.

It should be “stood offside”, not “Leaning offside”.
Should be taken from the ‘heel’ of the trailing foot. This stops having somebody with size 12s being offside, but somebody with size 7s being onside.
 
Should be taken from the ‘heel’ of the trailing foot. This stops having somebody with size 12s being offside, but somebody with size 7s being onside.
It’s a thought but think I’d prefer any part of the boot. Otherwise direction of travel would affect decisions.
a striker facing goal might have an advantageous over a defender facing away from goal.
 
It’s a thought but think I’d prefer any part of the boot. Otherwise direction of travel would affect decisions.
a striker facing goal might have an advantageous over a defender facing away from goal.
I think Wenger’s initial suggestion only referenced the heel of the attacker
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top