Before we play the friendly against Wales on 9th OctoberJust not sure which round of internationals :)
Before we play the friendly against Wales on 9th OctoberJust not sure which round of internationals :)
But not for long :(
i don't like your post.I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
Thanks for providing this information, I definitely wouldn't have the bollocks to do it with some of the nutters on here. Interesting that both parties seem confident.I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
How senior were they and what context was all this said?I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.

Or they have been fed a load of bollocks from Master's and his cronies so they can hang onto their positions to the very last minute before they are sacked.I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
i don't like your post.
I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
"On the eve" suggests an element of proximity to the event.He's using the definition of 'eve' that means at some point before the event.
about time we had bit of negativity been for to optimistic over last few pagesI don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
he;ll walk if club have lied to himJust look to Pep’s body language. That will tell you if we know or not! :)
@Ken92 is dying to like this post.I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
If it didnt why did the pl offer city a deal which we dismissed out of hand, like i said in a previous post if the PL had anything of substance there is no necessity for the 115 charges, the main charges would be more than enough without the window dressing.I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.
Of all the vast amount of content on this thread one line has stuck in my mind like no other (soz, can't remember the poster).I don’t post this lightly, but having spent the last few days with a couple of people in very senior positions at the PL - they are certainly feeling very confident in their position.
You’d expect that, to a point - and clearly this would only be of note or concern if we are to assume either the result has landed with both City and the PL already ahead of publication, and they are therefore reflecting an informed view - or if, given its imminence, the relevant parties have an early impression of the broad direction the ruling is going to take.
On this - it’s worth reiterating that @slbsn has been pretty clear that he has been told, as of close of play on Friday, neither party had received the result - so I’m hoping he’s right on that, as in that context the views relayed to me could simply be evidence of a general level of bravado/confidence/arrogance on behalf of the PL ahead of publication, and not indicative of any specific knowledge.
It’s also worth saying that I don’t know these people well, so whilst certain comments definitely felt more indiscreet than others - they could also simply be holding an agreed/mandated company line or corporate position on the charges which don’t indicate anything of substance either way.
But I find this unlikely, as I’d expect the company line would be to say nothing - and to hold that they are waiting for the panel to arrive at its judgement before making any substantive comments on the situation.
That said, they were definitely very bullish in tone, and dismissed any view that City’s position on the charges held any credibility whatsoever.