PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

johnnytapia said:
Glazer. On our website.
We had a choice. And we chose THAT. Unfuckingforgiveable in extremis.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was a major misjudgment by the big six’s overseas owners, I’m pretty sure he appeared on all their websites, I remember Liverpool and Chelsea fans also being angry about that very fact.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I think the word "pseudo" could cause misinterpretation (that is if you take the Greek meaning of pseudo = false). Maybe a phrase such as 'deceptive gibberish' might have fitted the context with more accuracy ;-).
Click to expand...
What I was (clearly not very well) trying to covey was that what he had written towards the end of his increasingly unhinged article was both false/fake and gibberish, rather than that it was fake-gibberish, hence the hyphen being incorrectly deployed by me.

I’d had a few when I posted it tbf!
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
What I was (clearly not very well) trying to covey was that what he had written towards the end of his increasingly unhinged article was both false/fake and gibberish, rather than that it was fake-gibberish, hence the hyphen being incorrectly deployed by me.

I’d had a few when I posted it tbf!
Click to expand...
Have few more G because I enjoy your thoughtful but direct posts that for me bring reality to such complex subjects.
 
NMB said:
Once again the Guardian are telling us to accept the Establishment. Shame on them
Click to expand...
The Guardian is no different to all of the so called liberal left... hoodwinked into being the Useful Idiots of the corporate and establishment entities they claim to be most opposed to.
 
NMB said:
Once again the Guardian are telling us to accept the Establishment. Shame on them
Click to expand...
The Grauniad is up there with the BBC as the most anti-City media sportsdesks in this country. Considering it has Manchester roots (and BBC Sport is based in Manchester), it’s disappointing (in both cases).

The Grauniad has displayed a lot of anti-Emirati sentiment over the years n’all.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
What I was (clearly not very well) trying to covey was that what he had written towards the end of his increasingly unhinged article was both false/fake and gibberish, rather than that it was fake-gibberish, hence the hyphen being incorrectly deployed by me.

I’d had a few when I posted it tbf!
Click to expand...
I know what your intention was mate. I was just being a smart arse. :-)
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It must be genius level sarcasm because I’m fucked if I can spot it. And even if it is it doesn’t detract from the point that in the absence of any evidence that City have deployed those tactics, reference to them in that article is both gratuitous and malicious.

As @bobbyowenquiff pointed out, as respondents to this action the club had no choice but to defend their position and deal with the allegations. His talk of city ‘countering’ the PL ‘so aggressively’ conspicuously (and consciously no doubt) fails to acknowledge this. The club is fucking defending itself. Any well-resourced commercial organisation facing an existential threat is going to deploy all the resources it can to resist such an attack. This is undeniable.

The number of charges is not something of the club’s choosing either, and such a charge sheet necessarily and logically requires longer to address than otherwise. Again this is undeniable.

Perhaps the most telling reveal of his intellectual dishonesty, however, is where on the one hand he lauds City’s ‘world class squad of legal experts’ in whose ‘brilliance’ he revels in respect of the 115, and yet on the other he questions the purpose of the same lawyer’s strategic approach to the APT settlement. Imperious in one dispute, and simultaneously clueless in the other. Fitting his interpretation around the conclusion he wants to arrive at, as people advancing a dishonest argument are prone to do.

And nowhere in there does he in any substantive way criticise the PL or suggest that there is even a possibility that these proceedings could have been flawed from the outset, rather than being rendered so by City’s ‘world class squad of legal experts’.

As the last few paragraphs descended into pseudo-gibberish I expect he was feeling little but frustration and overwhelming disappointment that his previous strident predictions of doom for the club were wholly misconceived and rather than acknowledge that, instead he went on an incoherent rant about the inequity of the overarching power of billionaires in a league that is replete with them.

The bloke‘s a **** and nowhere near as smart as he thinks he is.
Click to expand...
Needs more than one like pal.
 
Gordyola said:
Would only work if it was across the whole of football and there would have to be adjustment for currency and local variations
Click to expand...
The big European leagues all have different versions of spending limits, so any anomalies are a different problem.
 
mattcity5 said:
Or too much. Just let clubs do want they want and let competition happen naturally.

There are loads of good players out there, even if the top clubs spent loads on the players they wanted, there would still be plenty of other good players to pick from.
Click to expand...
Yep, that’s another solution I would favour but it’s not going to happen.
With UEFA restrictions in place for the top clubs, letting those not in euro competition catch up without hindrance would be my first choice in terms of creating a competitive league, but alas that won’t happen as there would be pressure to stop clubs bankrupting themselves. Of course, a limit on debt would work but the rags wouldn’t wear that and the same refusal would occur again in Europe.
 
Last edited:
halfcenturyup said:
I thought he was going for a clever use of subtle sarcasm. But, frankly, 200 words of complete waffle into it I was suffering myself from the realisation of wasted time he seems to be indicating the PL are feeling. I think?
Click to expand...

Most propagandists are left holding their dick when truth and reasoning hits them square in the face, IMHO the grift is nearly over for him/them.

Mind you saying that, if a media outlet told the world that ***Venezuela was in Europe and that ***Ali isn't dead a great many of these fuckwits would believe what they were told and believe it to be fact.

*** for any Guardian readers reading this, Venezuela is NOT in Europe but Ali might be living in Skegness running a pie shop.
 
Last edited:
BobKowalski said:
Civilisations will crumble and Empires will fall before we get this verdict. It will become the stuff of myth and legend with details lost or obscured with no one even remembering what the initial case was about. It will become spoken of in whispers and in the dark corners of the universe where the plaintive cry of ‘when will we hear ?’ will surf gently on the cosmic tides until the cry is heeded and the answer then comes ‘next Friday, mate. Nailed on’.
Click to expand...
Jarndice and Jarndice levels lol
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It must be genius level sarcasm because I’m fucked if I can spot it. And even if it is it doesn’t detract from the point that in the absence of any evidence that City have deployed those tactics, reference to them in that article is both gratuitous and malicious.

As @bobbyowenquiff pointed out, as respondents to this action the club had no choice but to defend their position and deal with the allegations. His talk of city ‘countering’ the PL ‘so aggressively’ conspicuously (and consciously no doubt) fails to acknowledge this. The club is fucking defending itself. Any well-resourced commercial organisation facing an existential threat is going to deploy all the resources it can to resist such an attack. This is undeniable.

The number of charges is not something of the club’s choosing either, and such a charge sheet necessarily and logically requires longer to address than otherwise. Again this is undeniable.

Perhaps the most telling reveal of his intellectual dishonesty, however, is where on the one hand he lauds City’s ‘world class squad of legal experts’ in whose ‘brilliance’ he revels in respect of the 115, and yet on the other he questions the purpose of the same lawyer’s strategic approach to the APT settlement. Imperious in one dispute, and simultaneously clueless in the other. Fitting his interpretation around the conclusion he wants to arrive at, as people advancing a dishonest argument are prone to do.

And nowhere in there does he in any substantive way criticise the PL or suggest that there is even a possibility that these proceedings could have been flawed from the outset, rather than being rendered so by City’s ‘world class squad of legal experts’.

As the last few paragraphs descended into pseudo-gibberish I expect he was feeling little but frustration and overwhelming disappointment that his previous strident predictions of doom for the club were wholly misconceived and rather than acknowledge that, instead he went on an incoherent rant about the inequity of the overarching power of billionaires in a league that is replete with them.

The bloke‘s a **** and nowhere near as smart as he thinks he is.
Click to expand...

Great summary, but you could have saved some time and just posted the final sentence.
 
halfcenturyup said:
It was probably part of a compulsory PR campaign for the ESL with coordinated press releases dreamt up by some idiot American who has no idea about football and what it means in the UK.

The fact that five of the clubs thought it was a good idea is no surprise as they are owned by other idiot Americans.

The fact that our club, which is supposedly run by sophisticated, wordly-wise executives who know what they are doing at management and board level, went along with it without questioning why is one of the biggest fuck ups in their time here.

Don't get me wrong, they have got almost everything right but, dear God, in the few instances where they do fuck up, then they fuck up completely.

And you know who I am going to blame for that ......
Click to expand...
Three clubs owned by Americans at the time, Abramovich sold Chelsea a full 12 months after the Super League announcement, Spurs are British owned. So, there is an argument that three clubs were pressured to go along with it. The questions that need to be asked is did these 3 American owners buy into the EPL with the Super League in mind? (my opinion absolutely) and did the 3 non- American owners buy their clubs for the same reason (my opinion no).
 
I think SCOTUS has a view on this. All US owned clubs can apparently appeal to Trump if City are cleared.
 
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