PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Colin Bells Boots said:
Totally agree.

The PL board must have been in agreement to proceed with the charges, and aware of the impact it would have.

I doubt the individual who sits on Sky's board, Mai Fyfield could hardly contain her enthusiasm for launching the charges either, as I seem to recall some of her comments being quite scathing towards City. Probably a dipper supporter as she appears to fit the profile - an opinionated **** !

The whole board is complicit, unless there were dissenters amongst who were out-voted ?
Click to expand...

I don’t know the answer to this question, but is it a foregone conclusion the board is complicit?

Masters is responsible for delivery of policy/strategy and operations. Did the decision to move forward with the 115 charges need Board sign off?
 
mcfcphil said:
I don’t know the answer to this question, but is it a foregone conclusion the board is complicit?

Masters is responsible for delivery of policy/strategy and operations. Did the decision to move forward with the 115 charges need Board sign off?
Click to expand...


Masters couldn't have been allowed just to act like a loose cannon and do whatever he wanted, unless of course the red cartel really do run the PL.
 
DiscoSteve said:
tick bloody tock... is the general consensus next opportunity is next international break?

I'm no longer stressed anymore after hearing some 'cough' potential good news in a bar on the strip in Benidorm one night last week - of course almost everyone was full of beer (including me) and talking bo**ocks at the time so ... ;-)
Click to expand...

I’ll only believe you might have good information if the provider was, ahem, “bullish”.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
Khaldoon has spoken highly about Alison Brittain so maybe its a soft signal, who knows, anyways it looks like she will be re-appointed as Chair of the PL, it's Masters who we need to see the back of.

The best bit for us states...

"A judgement which is interpreted as favourable to Manchester City would inevitably apply pressure to senior Premier League officials..."

news.sky.com

Premier League's Brittain seeks extra time as Manchester City verdict looms

Alison Brittain, the former Whitbread boss, will next month stand for a second three-year term as top-flight clubs await the outcome of the Premier League's landmark case against Manchester City, Sky News learns.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
Click to expand...
“but there remains little clarity about the timing of an outcome”.

Is it just me or does that read like an outcome is already known and they are trying to manage the “timing” of releasing it to the public?
 
TravisBickle said:
Is he really though??
I saw a post about an Arab takeover happening in the next few days in the MEN comments section after Sunderland match which was on a Sunday
Click to expand...
I wrote it as an exclusive in the News of the World on that Sunday but was told it was Kuwaiti.

It got picked up elsewhere and then I had the sports editor Mike Dunn winding me up a couple days later asking why I got the fucking country wrong!
 
Centurions said:
That's the complete opposite to a damaging story about Brittain. I also doubt it's been "leaked" as they are on fixed terms of office, so it wouldn't have been a surprise to anybody.
Click to expand...
Yes. I read it too quickly. On reflection the story is pretty neutral. That said her job will be at risk if they lose the case. Perhaps it is more gossip than a leak. This case is driving me up the wall!
 
mexico1970 said:
Masters couldn't have been allowed just to act like a loose cannon and do whatever he wanted, unless of course the red cartel really do run the PL.
Click to expand...

You would imagine the Board would have oversight of a decision of this magnitude against a leading club.

My point is, the Exec is responsible for delivery of good governance / running the business etc. Not every decision a business makes goes through the Board.

Masters wouldn’t be acting as a loose canon if enforcing financial governance (ie, charging clubs with breaches etc) is considered to be in the remit of the Exec and not something that requires Board oversight.
 
mcfcphil said:
You would imagine the Board would have oversight of a decision of this magnitude against a leading club.

My point is, the Exec is responsible for delivery of good governance / running the business etc. Not every decision a business makes goes through the Board.

Masters wouldn’t be acting as a loose canon if enforcing financial governance (ie, charging clubs with breaches etc) is considered to be in the remit of the Exec and not something that requires Board oversight.
Click to expand...


This is huge though mate, I reckon he was a loose cannon he can't have had backing surely? This Brittain character seems to have got away with a lot of the flak though maybe because she's a lady?
 
mexico1970 said:
This is huge though mate, I reckon he was a loose cannon he can't have had backing surely? This Brittain character seems to have got away with a lot of the flak though maybe because she's a lady?
Click to expand...

It is huge - but if it’s Masters’ job to run the day-to-day operation of the ship, it’s on him (female / male nothing to do with it)
 
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