mostly utter drivel
he/him
Joined July 2012
- Tweets75.4K
- Following572
- Followers11K
- Likes6.3K
fans can react however they choose to. but if everything sticks at the end of the day, they are evaporating any chance of it not sticking to them as well. few will have the grace to still think the fans are innocent. they might not care about that right now, but they maybe should
city supporters (and, to a lesser extent, the players) are close to facing some of the harshest punishments this sport has ever seen for something none of us had any involvement in doing. if we want to wave inflatable bananas, do some rage bait chants, and self deprecate in response to that, we will.
this ISN’T a call for violins or (unwanted) sympathy for city supporters. it also isn’t a plea for you believe the club don’t ‘deserve’ punishment - if rules were broken, rules were broken. i’m also not here to tell you you can’t feel wronged by our board if their actions have wronged your club. not my place or intent to dictate your feelings.
what i am pointing out, though, is just because YOU want US to do this performative, depressive, grovelling and begging for forgiveness for something we, as fans or players, had NO involvement in, it doesn’t mean we should.
self deprication and resorting to humour and jokes is something city supporters have done for decades. we choose to respond to objectively naff situations (like facing threats of expulsion from the football pyramid) in this way, as is our right. hell, even after winning the treble we still chant about never winning home or away and losing last week as well as today ffs.
you don’t have to like it. but if believe we should pack in something that’s become a staple trait of city supporters just because it doesn’t align with your world view or moral compass that you think is gospel, then respectfully you really need to give your head a wobble🍌
assuming city are found bang to rights after appeal - and the evidence comes out to show all that - fans will try naturally to separate themselves from the owners by saying ‘we didn’t know’. but for many, we’re seeing right now that it’ll be ‘we didn’t know, and we didn’t care’.
it is genuinely quite sad that fans are being sold this absolute fantasy. none of this has any remote basis in reality, and is so clearly the output of an AI prompt to try and placate fans who don’t know any better. i genuinely almost feel sorry for you for believing this.
An insight into City’s legal strategy on 114.
City have recently recruited Mark Howard described as a “super silk” a term used for a highly distinguished King’s Counsel (KC). He joins a legal team that includes Lord David Pannick KC, who has led City’s defence in the long-running case.
What follows is where the legal battle appears to stand between City, Etihad, and the Premier League following the Independent Commission’s verdict.
1. The Snook Trap: How the PL Committed a Massive Legal Error
Under English law (Snook precedent), to declare a contract a "sham," you have to prove both parties intended to deceive. The PL’s three KCs found City guilty of fraud via "adverse inferences" because City refused to turn over Etihad’s books. But here’s the catch: the PL never once interviewed Etihad or audited their banking records. They effectively shifted the burden of proof to City to prove a negative, which is legal quicksand in a real court.
1. Why Pannick Left Etihad Out of the Initial Tribunal
It looks like a deliberate tactical play by Lord Pannick KC.
By keeping Etihad as a "non-party," the PL’s tribunal made definitive findings of corporate fraud against a multi-billion-dollar global airline without ever giving them a Right to Reply (Audi alteram partem).
Bringing Etihad in earlier would have subjected them to massive, un-secure disclosure pools vulnerable to the PL's historic mainstream media leaks.
1. Etihad’s High Court "Nuclear Option"
Because Etihad is a separate corporate entity and not a PL member, they aren’t bound by football arbitration rules. Etihad’s threat to sue the PL for commercial defamation in the English High Court completely upends the case:
Strict Confidentiality Rings: In a real court, Etihad can safely hand over verified Abu Dhabi bank routing records and independent audits under judge-supervised security—completely shielded from leaks to rival clubs.
Destroying the "Spoofed Payments" Theory: Once a High Court judge validates that the sponsorship funds came entirely from Etihad’s own commercial revenue, the PL’s "sham contract" ruling is legally dead. City can then port that judicially stamped proof directly into the football appeal.
1. The "Prosecutorial" Panel and Fallback Findings
Did the three KCs act impartially? It’s highly debatable. By reverse-engineering the judgment with "backup charges" (like non-cooperation and acting in bad faith), they tried to make the verdict appeal-proof. But if Pannick proves the primary "sham" ruling was built on an unlawful legal process, the secondary fallback findings logically collapse with it.
1. CAS vs. The "Kangaroo" Football Tribunal
The PL deliberately ignored the 2020 CAS verdict (which cleared City of hiding equity funding) by exploiting the fact that the domestic PL rulebook has no statute of limitations. They used lower evidential standards to bypass the supreme court of world sport. Pannick will aggressively argue on appeal that ignoring a definitive CAS ruling on the exact same contracts constitutes an abuse of process.
1. Geopolitical Fallout: UAE Threats & Whitehall Frustration
It’s now spilling into international diplomacy. Emirati officials have reportedly warned the UK Government that the severity of the ruling directly threatens a £30 billion UK-UAE investment pipeline, clouding an upcoming London investment summit. UK officials are furious because they are facing massive economic pressure from a foreign state over a private sports tribunal that the government has zero constitutional power to interfere with.
The Bottom Line: Pannick is executing a brilliant multi-front counter-offensive. By stalling the compressed PL appeal timeline and letting Etihad loose in the High Court, he is forcing the Premier League to defend its leaked, circumstantial case in a real court of law where they have no safety net.
absolutely psychotic take that is emblematic of the disregard many football fans hold for the integrity of the sport they purport to care about. a 150 year old institution should ‘naturally drop into extinction’ because they’ve been horribly mismanaged and failed to keep up? vile
city certainly aren’t sending their best and brightest are they
There’s a glaring hypocrisy among those who have declared Manchester City guilty before the process has concluded. For them, City are already guilty. There is no verdict left to await, no evidence left to assess and no process left to respect. City must simply accept whatever punishment follows, while players (former and current) and fans are expected to adopt particular views about the owners and the club’s conduct. Everything has already been decided.
But ask those same people whether they’d accept City being cleared, including following any appeal, and the response is invariably: “OK. They got away with it.” So a guilty verdict must be respected, but an innocent one can be dismissed? They don’t want due process. They want their predetermined verdict validated.
yeah that’s an absolutely stellar argument, which i have no doubt would go down a treat in front a judge. get lord pannick on the ringer and let him know they need to shift strategies.
This Post is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more
it’s really funny you should bring this up - a meeting widely reported to have been about ongoing proposals for increased broadcast revenue sharing based on league position. now i wonder which club was principally driving those proposals?
fascinating argument. as we all know, there’s a direct link between money spent and playing exciting football. that’s why utd, liverpool, and spurs have been so scintillating recently - while brighton, bournemouth, brentford, and palace have been absolute boring dross, of course.
salary caps won’t ever get off the ground for as long as the PFA continue to challenge them at every opportunity. they are literally currently suing the EFL in the high court over it. they have already said they will do the same if the PL tries to introduce them. so now what?
isn’t it funny how the majority of PL clubs supporting the current rules apparently represents a ‘cartel’ - but a handful of clubs with the wealthiest owners in football who want to remove all financial restrictions so they can exert total domination apparently doesn’t?
still waiting on this wonderful sit down we were all promised, khaldoon. any day now i’m sure
City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak on ‘the charges’…
“Let me be as consistent as I’ve always been – until we have a ruling, I can’t say much.
“Once we have a ruling, believe me, Chris, we’re going to have a wonderful sit down together and I'll say everything I've wanted to say for the last three years.”
