Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,900
Yes.Depends on the lawyer…
he might be quite good, in which case you could get thousands...
Yes.Depends on the lawyer…
It might have some incompetents but as the most successful league in world sporting history there are clearly people in and around the organisation, including their legal advisors, who wouldn’t just throw god knows how many tens of millions at an irrefutable case. I can’t see a panel sitting for three months and deliberating/documenting for 9 months either.
Love leaks.
We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.It always amazes me that some people seem to think in terms of these claimed groupings as though the league was made up not of 20 self-contained and frankly self-interested entities but instead two blocs, for all the world like the Eastern bloc and the Western bloc during the cold war days.
There are certain issues on which City's interest are akin to Newcastle's. On others, they are not. They have made common cause with United about (for instance, IIRC) the squad cost ratio suggestions, but were on diametrically opposed sides during the APT votes. Villa and Forest take the same view as City where it suits their interests to do so, not when it doesn't. Equally, the idea that every one of the US owned clubs has exactly the same agenda and exactly the some priorities and will therefore vote in exactly the same way on every single issue seems to me to be obvious nonsense.
Likewise all 20 of the clubs in the league.
I sometimes wonder, as an aside, why it was that clubs like Brighton and Brentford took the side of the history clubs on the APT issue, but doubtless they will have had their own reasons for doing so.
It always amazes me that some people seem to think in terms of these claimed groupings as though the league was made up not of 20 self-contained and frankly self-interested entities but instead two blocs, for all the world like the Eastern bloc and the Western bloc during the cold war days.
There are certain issues on which City's interest are akin to Newcastle's. On others, they are not. They have made common cause with United about (for instance, IIRC) the squad cost ratio suggestions, but were on diametrically opposed sides during the APT votes. Villa and Forest take the same view as City where it suits their interests to do so, not when it doesn't. Equally, the idea that every one of the US owned clubs has exactly the same agenda and exactly the some priorities and will therefore vote in exactly the same way on every single issue seems to me to be obvious nonsense.
Likewise all 20 of the clubs in the league.
I sometimes wonder, as an aside, why it was that clubs like Brighton and Brentford took the side of the history clubs on the APT issue, but doubtless they will have had their own reasons for doing so.
Neither Spurs nor Arsenal will have much feel at all (if any) for how it went.must have good idea how it went though, not that thats conclusive
Yes but you’re totally ignoring what is the heart of this discussion, certainly from my point view: what is the “this”?Interesting debate on here (for a change).
There's two contrasting views, one that the PL entered into this in an entirely fair-handed, non-judgemental way, without any pressure and solely motivated by the desire to uphold the sanctity of their financial framework. The other group believe this is largely politically motivated and that a cabal of US-owned clubs are collaborating to try to derail us.
Re the former belief, there are also people who believe that there's a man with a beard who lives on a cloud and can bring down plagues of locusts, floods, fire & brimstone and turn people into pillars of salt merely by twitching his nose, or finger, or however he does that sort of thing.
The club, on the other hand, is in the latter camp, and I'll repeat what a senior official told me a while ago. That official was close to the group around our owner and this was said while both UEFA and the PL were investigating us. The exact quote was "We know who's behind this. It's the US-owned clubs, plus there's a geopolitical element".
It also wasn't coincidence that Levy's name got mentioned. It's been said that it was him who rang Masters after the CAS verdict to push him into launching the PL's charges, which they did so hurriedly that they got some of those laughably wrong.
Remember what Khaldoon said about knowing who's saying what about us? I doubt that was bluff.
Because I speak to a lot of people.How can you know that.
No idea, probably just hearsayWhat's all this i'm reading on here, something about a legal case?
It really isThe first post was on the 6th February 2023, we have been made to suffer this shit for over 32 months now. It is bloody ridiculous.
1 english pound each wowhere you go
View attachment 171811
I don't believe you.We've been cleared mate.
Get a swamp season ticket !Love leaks.
There’s a man with a beard who sounds a bit of a ****.All these new pages I haven't read, have I missed anything ?
I agree with all of that.I'm still not buying the argument that a three month hearing and a nine month wait for the award is anything other than a reflection of the number of allegations and the volume of evidence and counter-evidence that has been presented.
No-one had a problem at the time with a three month hearing. No-one at the time had a problem with a long wait for the award, even if most of us thought it would be done by now.
And, most importantly, the standard of proof required for the PL to prove its allegations is still the same as it ever was. And I can't see how they can meet that standard when we have a pretty good idea from CAS of the sort of counter-evidence the club will have presented.
Finally, the idea that the PL wouldn't proceed if they thought they weren't going to win doesn't add up in my book, either. There were plenty of other factors that could have been taken into account in the decision to refer the club to a disciplinary panel, other than just the chance of success.
All imho, of course.
“Peter, we’ve got your ball-pein hammer, your hair strands, your blood and a five £ note only given to two people. And Les Battersby has a golden alibi.”People frequently go against the legal advice they are given for all sorts of reasons. Often not related to the quality of that advice.