gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I like you.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
ayrshire_blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2008
- Messages
- 6,642
If the Premier League are successful it will be released 10.00am.
If City are successful it will be released at 10.00am.
The papers already have crash editions written up for both outcomes and background.
MANCHESTER CITY GUILTY of one out of the 130 charges. They've been unequivocally cleared of the other 129 and their only crime was the grass being too long for an FA cup tie against Port Vale.
MANCHESTER CITY GUILTY.
Guessing the headlines look something like these.
Having seen the email exchange and checked multiple elements of it (things like the working linkedin link), I think it is real. On top of that it matches exactly what other sources have said.I’m not sure why you are so unequivocally convinced that email purporting to be from Pannick is bona fide, unless you’ve had a PM and/or email corroborating it as such.
Not saying you’re necessarily wrong; I was sceptical personally for reasons that I previously outlined, but I’m not especially arsed if I am because I’m not formally and professionally putting my name to what I was saying on the matter, and because being wrong about something like that isn’t the end of the world, at least from my perspective, but I’m bound to wonder where that level of absolute certainty comes from (unless there’s something subsequent in this thread that I’ve missed).
As for being wrong, if I am wrong, I am wrong. Who cares. But as it is I am trying, in good faith, to help fans understand the situation and to not be mislead by people claiming things that I do not believe to be true based on my information.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Not arguing with anything in your second paragraph, just wondered why you were so unshakeably sure and assumed it was something extraneous to what has been posted in here (other than its contents being in accordance with other sources).Having seen the email exchange and checked multiple elements of it (things like the working linkedin link), I think it is real. On top of that it matches exactly what other sources have said.
As for being wrong, if I am wrong, I am wrong. Who cares. But as it is I am trying, in good faith, to help fans understand the situation and to not be mislead by people claiming things that I do not believe to be true based on my information.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
No! The possibility of an appeal would only be if procedure hadn't been followedSome while back it was said ( on here ) that after the announcement that won't be the end of things because the loser was bound to appeal , I wonder if the delay now is due to a kind of arbitration going on in the background so that when the announcement does come it will really be the end of the matter ( hopefully ! ! )
There cant be background arbitration as both parties, as of last Friday, haven't had the verdict
To be clear, I was sent the actual email exchange - with its metadata and links etc (not just a screenshot). I also ran a check for any inconsistencies and none were found. It is real.Not arguing with anything in your second paragraph, just wondered why you were so unshakeably sure and assumed it was something extraneous to what has been posted in here (other than its contents being in accordance with other sources).
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Assumed as much. Thanks. I stand corrected on its provenance then.To be clear, I was sent the actual email exchange - with its metadata and links etc (not just a screenshot). I also ran a check for any inconsistencies and none were found. It is real.
@slbsn i.e Assurances give to Haaland before contract renewal would align with thisThey might not know the decision, but surely the lawyers who were in the hearing have a good idea of the outcome? I.e the PL’s evidence was thrown out or called baseless. Journos who report on Supreme Court trials always have a fairly sure idea which way it’ll fall just hearing the judges questioning.
blue b4 the moon
Well-Known Member
I can think of a few stronger words for the PL and all who sail with the tyranny of the majority than silly.but this is what is silly, why would the governing body be disappointed that it couldnt impose sanctions on one of its members.
DJBusinesscake
Well-Known Member
Groundhog Day
Because they'll need the money?but this is what is silly, why would the governing body be disappointed that it couldnt impose sanctions on one of its members.
remember arthur mann
Well-Known Member
Not a lot.I like you.
calumdown
Well-Known Member
this delicious strapline defined you for years.I like you.
not sure why you stopped using it.
i have a vague memory of you trying to replace it with something that proved to be less successful.
i vote you bring it back more often.
BerkshireBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 4,513
No, first is the verdict, then you can appeal the verdict if a matter of law like an error has occured. After that it's the punishment award, then you can appeal that as well if it's too harsh and £10m fine for non coo-operation is too harshLet's say we are cleared of all the financial stuff but found guilty of non cooperation and get a £10m fine.
If we appeal the fine, does that appeal then look at all the charges again meaning we could be done for more after an appeal or would it just look at the parts we are arguing about?
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
It was months at most.this delicious strapline defined you for years.
not sure why you stopped using it.
i have a vague memory of you trying to replace it with something that proved to be less successful.
i vote you bring it back more often.
It became hackneyed.
Less successful ffs!
I just did.
Blue_Lightsaber
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2022
- Messages
- 4,592
- Team supported
- Man City
If the Premier League are successful it will be released 10.00am.
If City are successful it will be released at 10.00am.
The papers already have crash editions written up for both outcomes and background.
What if they intentionally publish the wrong one to slime City even more??
Blue_Lightsaber
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2022
- Messages
- 4,592
- Team supported
- Man City
MANCHESTER CITY GUILTY of one out of the 130 charges. They've been unequivocally cleared of the other 129 and their only crime was the grass being too long for an FA cup tie against Port Vale.
MANCHESTER CITY GUILTY.
Guessing the headlines look something like these.
Must be the grass is too tall charge!
Rains enough in Manchester that it grows at a crazy speed.
What are "Papers"? I get all my information from football365. Very reputable.If the Premier League are successful it will be released 10.00am.
If City are successful it will be released at 10.00am.
The papers already have crash editions written up for both outcomes and background.
Last edited:
calumdown
Well-Known Member
according to the search engine on here...It was months at most.
the first time you used it was 8th feb 2013,
to m.e.s.
you then used it a further 385 times up until 26th feb 2017,
to millwayawayveteran1988.
i know, i'm sad, but i was sure it was that way :)
and you probably won't like me