They are our best team by far to represent the PL..I love watching them.Apart from West Ham(in the blood),they are the only team,I will put myself out to watch.
terrya1965 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:21 am
Personally,I am pleased.
They are our best team by far to represent the PL..I love watching them.Apart from West Ham(in the blood),they are the only team,I will put myself out to watch.
Completely agree ! I think it was something of a witch hunt as well. I believe if the verdict had gone the other way, they have evidence of dozens of other clubs in Europe that have done similar things to get round the rules.
Man City are picked on because UEFA do not like English clubs let alone stinking rich ones.
terrya1965 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:21 am
Personally,I am pleased.
They are our best team by far to represent the PL..I love watching them.Apart from West Ham(in the blood),they are the only team,I will put myself out to watch.
Totally agree. Liverpool have been hugely dominant but a lot of teams have been too passive and easily brushed aside because of that. The teams that have taken the fight to Liverpool have competed better than expected (us for one) and represent a trend that can be seen over the last 10 games.
It's good for football and next season will be all the better for it.
palerider wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:52 am
The Blunts' march has already reached Matlock.
Isn't that the wrong way ?
Personally I'm pleased the decision has been overturned and, in any case, I could never get my head around the idea that the ban may be reduced as a kind of compromise solution. Surely a court of appeal determines whether the right verdict was handed down, not the actual punishment. If City were found to have broken the (silly) FFP rules the ban would have stayed but as they've been exonerated the only action was to lift the ban.
Or have I missed something ?
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
palerider wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 10:52 am
The Blunts' march has already reached Matlock.
Isn't that the wrong way ?
Personally I'm pleased the decision has been overturned and, in any case, I could never get my head around the idea that the ban may be reduced as a kind of compromise solution. Surely a court of appeal determines whether the right verdict was handed down, not the actual punishment. If City were found to have broken the (silly) FFP rules the ban would have stayed but as they've been exonerated the only action was to lift the ban.
Or have I missed something ?
Without looking at a map I don't think so. My aunt lives in Matlock and that's Derbyshire, ie the Midlands. Sheffield is oop north.
Personally I'm pleased the decision has been overturned and, in any case, I could never get my head around the idea that the ban may be reduced as a kind of compromise solution. Surely a court of appeal determines whether the right verdict was handed down, not the actual punishment. If City were found to have broken the (silly) FFP rules the ban would have stayed but as they've been exonerated the only action was to lift the ban.
Or have I missed something ?
Without looking at a map I don't think so. My aunt lives in Matlock and that's Derbyshire, ie the Midlands. Sheffield is oop north.
You are quite correct. I was basing my assumption on a memory of many years ago when I used to travel to our games in Manchester on the St Pancras to Manchester line. Always remember the train stopped at Matlock Bath. Just assumed it was further north than it is, and I also had the (mistaken) idea that Sheffield, being in South Yorkshire was, well, further south.
Geography never was my strong point.
Why Is There Only One Monopolies Commission. Isn't That A Monopoly?
