|
Post by Zamoraaaah on May 3, 2011 7:26:46 GMT
The presumption of guilt by all and sundry has been quite shocking. Plus the alledged FA source leaking to the press before the case has even started has to make one question the legitimacy and honesty of the FA and their procedures.
IF found guilty surely we'd have huge ammunition for an appeal.
I also wonder if a civil case would follow? If so we could potentialy bancrupt the FA with £100 million+ lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 7:43:10 GMT
Personally if I was in charge of the QPR Defense, I'd had Lakshmi Mittal and Bernie Ecclestone appear at the hearing this morning. Sending just a subliminal message of who's behind/backing QPR - and what financial resources they have.
(I wouldn't have Flavio come!)
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on May 3, 2011 7:55:09 GMT
The Orange Donut is likely to try and biff them all.
|
|
|
Post by blueeyedcptcook on May 3, 2011 8:55:40 GMT
Yes, but who better than running the FA into a stone wall.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:01:45 GMT
IF we're found guilty/deducted points and we appeal...Is the appeal to the FA? So say judges (just different faces) will decide the appeal?
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 9:10:45 GMT
SSN have a camera crew outside Wembley for exciting updates! The QC who represented Sheffield United is representing us, carrying in boxes and boxes of paperwork!
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:13:14 GMT
SSN have a camera crew outside Wembley for exciting updates! The QC who represented Sheffield United is representing us, carrying in boxes and boxes of paperwork! Consisting of papers for ALL the players signed, loaned and sold (as well as managers hired and fired) during Gianni's seven years at Loftus Road?
|
|
|
Post by superckat on May 3, 2011 9:14:53 GMT
SSN have a camera crew outside Wembley for exciting updates! The QC who represented Sheffield United is representing us, carrying in boxes and boxes of paperwork! Hang on. Didn't they lose their case? or were they the ones who won the £30m. Still I'd rather have the West Ham QC who got them off with just a fine
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:16:06 GMT
Sheffield United got the money....West Ham Got the Premiership
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 9:17:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 9:17:59 GMT
Sheffield United got the money....West Ham Got the Premiership Well that isn't the best of starts then
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:20:07 GMT
Thanks CPR. Interesting cases he's been involved with
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 9:20:54 GMT
Then again after reading cpr's link, I have a renewed sense of confidence. He looks a pretty good lawyer on paper.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:22:40 GMT
Request: Obviously if something's hot news/rumour re the case, feel free to highlight and start a new thread. But if possible, if can keep to one or two (or three) threads today on this subject, it would be appreciated! Thanks
|
|
eskey8
Dave Sexton
www.cycle2austria.com
Posts: 2,274
|
Post by eskey8 on May 3, 2011 9:22:54 GMT
Is it possible we could hear the outcome BEFORE friday?
|
|
|
Post by grahamqpr77 on May 3, 2011 9:25:48 GMT
just seen the barrister on sky sports news going into the fa , its the same barrister who represented sheff utd ,in the tevez case ,i dont no if thats agood thing or a bad thing
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 9:25:56 GMT
Sooner rather than later, earlier outcome is more positive in our favour methinks. The longer it goes on, the more likely we are to be fighting on the back foot, as it were!
|
|
|
Post by superckat on May 3, 2011 9:30:21 GMT
Must admit he does sound the business
"Sports law – “the guy you go to if you really want to tough it out – he’s a real fighter and a fantastic cross-examiner”."
and
"first-rate trial advocate and a particularly exceptional cross-examiner"
"Media, Entertainment & Sport – “formidable cross-examiner and brilliant strategist"
I suppose he'll do.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:31:46 GMT
Yup...Obviously we don't know how strong our case is. All we can do is maximize our chances by having a very good lawyer doing his best.
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 9:31:11 GMT
I don't think an experienced lawyer like Mr Mill would take on a case like this if he wasn't confident we would win
|
|
|
Post by superckat on May 3, 2011 9:34:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 9:41:34 GMT
Yes, at 10:22 I edited it
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:47:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by superckat on May 3, 2011 9:50:14 GMT
"Yes, at 10:22 I edited it "
That's cheating. Report, I want him banned or whipped.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 9:50:18 GMT
I just experienced a click refusal.
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 9:55:30 GMT
To summarize, Nodge doesn't think Palios is ITK...Still thinks will be points deduction but more around 5...The Paladini charges - even if "guilty" shouldnt apply to a points deduction. And the most serious charge is the one of "knowingly submitting false paperwork"
|
|
|
Post by superckat on May 3, 2011 9:55:43 GMT
Nodges's post copy and pasted from WATRBS for those who can't get access
I'm leaving the messageboards and blogs well alone after I write this til Friday pm, if not, I fear for my sanity and would disrupt the usual day to day stuff! By the time I "wake up", hopefully this nightmare will be over...
1. Palios - I would surmise that if he has ANY remaining contacts at the FA, they would not be in any position to cast comment on our case. In fact, given the way Palios was known for treating his staff during his short tenure as Chief Exec, I'd be mildly surprised if anyone at all was still on anything more than "professional business terms" with him, least of all people like Graham Mackrell on the disciplinary commitee. He's based his comments on the Luton scenario (co-incidentally under his watch!) which do not bear close scrutiny to our charges.
2. Points deduction - this will still happen IMO as I've said pretty consistently BUT, I don't think will be anywhere near the 15-30 some media doom mongers are getting excitable about. Fine "could" be around £5m if no points are deducted.
3. The charges. 7 charges, of which two are personally applicable to GP (no points deduction possible there). Of the 5 charges against the club, by far the most serious is the one of knowingly submitting false paperwork. This is the one that will cause the most bother and the one that a paper trail "could" lead to worse things to follow. There is a disrepute charge (no point deduction), the unauthorised agent charge (£30k fine precedent this season). I can see only two of those 5 charges that, in my PERSONAL opinion, could feasibly result in a points deduction in a worse case scenario.
4. Paul Smith's Twitter info.... if correct, this is an incredibly bad move. Sets us up as the "bad guys", makes us look shifty and doing anything we can to avoid ANY hearing despite the protestations (and submission to the FA) of complete innocence. I doubt the FA would look on this favourably.
5. Cardiff or Swansea would not be punished for an identical incident as the FAW rules have no criteria over 3rd party ownership. Yet Cardiff or Swansea stand to gain a £60m place in the PL for us committing an offence that they could not be charged with. Fair?
God speed.....see you all on the other side.
|
|
|
Post by Jon Doeman on May 3, 2011 9:58:43 GMT
I think he might have the right idea, giving the MBs a rest till Friday!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 10:01:02 GMT
I think we've covered most of that ourselves, the only thing I disagree with is the points deduction, as Nodge knows. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on May 3, 2011 10:02:37 GMT
Point 5 is another I would use in our defence. The double standards of the Welsh FA.
|
|