by From Despair To Where? » 02 Apr 2024 16:54
by royal67 » 02 Apr 2024 17:02
From Despair To Where? I'd take anything Darragh McAnthony says with a inch of salt, the bloke's full of shit.
by Hendo » 02 Apr 2024 17:36
royal67From Despair To Where? I'd take anything Darragh McAnthony says with a inch of salt, the bloke's full of shit.
^^ This...... ^^ I would imagine that if he had foot to stand on legally he would have called us out during that interview.
by tmesis » 02 Apr 2024 17:54
royal67From Despair To Where? I'd take anything Darragh McAnthony says with a inch of salt, the bloke's full of shit.
^^ This...... ^^ I would imagine that if he had foot to stand on legally he would have called us out during that interview.
by Snowflake Royal » 02 Apr 2024 18:08
tmesisroyal67From Despair To Where? I'd take anything Darragh McAnthony says with a inch of salt, the bloke's full of shit.
^^ This...... ^^ I would imagine that if he had foot to stand on legally he would have called us out during that interview.
He seems to think he had a legal case because the suspended part of the 12 point penalty got applied later, even though it didn't get applied until March of the following season, because we hadn't breached our business plan until then.
by Crusader Royal » 02 Apr 2024 18:22
Snowflake Royaltmesisroyal67 ^^ This...... ^^ I would imagine that if he had foot to stand on legally he would have called us out during that interview.
He seems to think he had a legal case because the suspended part of the 12 point penalty got applied later, even though it didn't get applied until March of the following season, because we hadn't breached our business plan until then.
Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
by Clyde1998 » 02 Apr 2024 18:28
Crusader RoyalSnowflake Royaltmesis He seems to think he had a legal case because the suspended part of the 12 point penalty got applied later, even though it didn't get applied until March of the following season, because we hadn't breached our business plan until then.
Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
by From Despair To Where? » 02 Apr 2024 19:42
Crusader RoyalSnowflake Royaltmesis He seems to think he had a legal case because the suspended part of the 12 point penalty got applied later, even though it didn't get applied until March of the following season, because we hadn't breached our business plan until then.
Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
by Snowflake Royal » 02 Apr 2024 20:01
Crusader RoyalSnowflake Royaltmesis He seems to think he had a legal case because the suspended part of the 12 point penalty got applied later, even though it didn't get applied until March of the following season, because we hadn't breached our business plan until then.
Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
by Crusader Royal » 02 Apr 2024 20:20
Snowflake RoyalCrusader RoyalSnowflake Royal Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
Given the business plan required millions in player sales, and players can only be sold in two windows, by making no effort to hawk anyone out except a failed attempt with Puscas is deciding not to comply with the business plan, and not complying with it long before the final date.
Don't know whether the FL work to standard practice where intent is important, in criminal terms Actus Reus and Mens Rhea, or if they operate on a strict liability basis with only the act important, not intent.
But if they do include intent, which would be reasonable, we clearly had the intent from the get go.
by tmesis » 02 Apr 2024 20:21
Snowflake RoyalCrusader RoyalSnowflake Royal Arguably we'd chosen to breach it before we signed it and certainly by the end of the summer transfer window.
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
Given the business plan required millions in player sales, and players can only be sold in two windows, by making no effort to hawk anyone out except a failed attempt with Puscas is deciding not to comply with the business plan, and not complying with it long before the final date.
Don't know whether the FL work to standard practice where intent is important, in criminal terms Actus Reus and Mens Rhea, or if they operate on a strict liability basis with only the act important, not intent.
But if they do include intent, which would be reasonable, we clearly had the intent from the get go.
by Sutekh » 03 Apr 2024 08:15
tmesisSnowflake RoyalCrusader Royal
But surely until it was actually breached there wasn’t an issue ?
I know there are some offences in which you can be accused of planning to do something or conspiracy but I don’t think this would be the case here. It would be like arresting someone driving at 30mph on the basis that they had already decided to drive at 80 a few miles down the road.
Given the business plan required millions in player sales, and players can only be sold in two windows, by making no effort to hawk anyone out except a failed attempt with Puscas is deciding not to comply with the business plan, and not complying with it long before the final date.
Don't know whether the FL work to standard practice where intent is important, in criminal terms Actus Reus and Mens Rhea, or if they operate on a strict liability basis with only the act important, not intent.
But if they do include intent, which would be reasonable, we clearly had the intent from the get go.
The EFL agreed our spending, as they had to clear any signings we made.
They'd have had to agree to our planned income too, even if it did include player sales. Quite how you can prove we deliberately didn't sell players would be very hard to do. Puscas was obviously a gamble on Pisa going up, that failed, but unless we were turning down bids for players, the fact that we didn't sell anyone isn't proof we wouldn't have done so if we'd got a decent bid.
The fact remains though that you can't backdate a points deduction, and Peterborough were not unfairly relegated.
by SouthDownsRoyal » 03 Apr 2024 11:49
by sputnik » 03 Apr 2024 13:00
by SouthDownsRoyal » 03 Apr 2024 19:01
sputnik bit harsh on winnie
by morganb » 30 Apr 2024 07:47
by East Grinstead Royal » 30 Apr 2024 08:48
by From Despair To Where? » 30 Apr 2024 11:55
by Pepe the Horseman » 30 Apr 2024 17:43
From Despair To Where? In the pre Bundesliga regionalised days (pre 1963), Schalke were the biggest club in Germany.
by From Despair To Where? » 30 Apr 2024 17:53
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 205 guests