UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%
  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%
  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%

  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
There was no clamour for it , I think some of us knew how it would go & it’s been worse , the effect of non celebration of goals I don’t think anyone saw coming , it’s destroyed the best part about football.
There was, and I was always against it, however now it’s here it isn’t going away. I’ haven’t seen non celebration of goals at games, there is celebration then a wait. I was at both spurs games with the ruled out goals so I get the problem.
Simple changes to the offside and handball rules would eliminate most of these ruled out goals and VAR when used for clear and obvious as it was intended, and in some places is used then just bad goals not dubious goals would be ruled out.Jesus’s goal last night wasn’t a push and don’t think VAR looked at it otherwise the monitor would've been used, I can be sure in the premier league it would have gone to a long review and they would have been looking for reasons to rule it out. Our VAR is just very badly using the tools available.
 
I've seen an email screenshot today on Sad Cafe purporting to from the football leaks hack?

I fear what's more amateur, the Etihad invoicing email or the content which clearly states ADUG and not ADEC?

The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact that ADUG didn't pay.

It would just be nice to see them explain the conflict. FairSkies proves Executive Committee paid, email says ADUG...the only conclusion is that the email is wrong and not a record of what happened.

But will they ever admit that?
 
I thought VAR might be a good idea too but I was wrong and didn't think through the consequences of not being able to celebrate goals fully anymore in case they're reviewed and disallowed 5 minutes later. I don't know any league where they don't use VAR to check goals and can't see it ever not being used for that purpose so I completely disagree that there are places where it works fine and it will work fine in the future.

I never said I've given up football by the way, just my season ticket. I wish more football fans would have done the same to be honest because I think the game would be better but I suppose it's not just your SkySports subscriber who likes VAR although then again, aren't you from Scotland so I can't imagine you get to many matches anyway?
Why , you think Scotlands a far away place, think some fans based further into Scotland than me have season tickets. Is an opinion better if you go to 20 games or 7 ?
 
There is nothing wrong with VAR. The problem is with the guys who are in Stockley Park and are implementing it. Afterall they are the ones that take their time to check the video replays. They had no problem last night with VAR all decisions were done within a minute, and were correct.
That's because the goals weren'truled out, and I'd like to see any referee make a good reasoned decision in 90 seconds when they have to review numerous angles under huge pressure. The system is flawed.

They'll change aspects in the Summer. The question is how far they will go. I would scrap it entirely. I think they will in time but will try tinkering with it first
 
The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact, that ADUG didn't pay.


That's the email. Has Conn confirmed it as a fact it wasn't ADUG - I thought he just lifted Colin's find on the Open Skies investigation?
 
That's the email. Has Conn confirmed it as a fact it wasn't ADUG - I thought he just lifted Colin's find on the Open Skies investigation?

Well he's written the article using the Open Skies leak

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ip-covered-by-abu-dhabi-government-not-etihad

I suppose you could argue he's not presenting it as definite fact in the paper, only detailing the leaked email, but IIRC he was more certain in his language on twitter.

Either way both cannot be true, and I'd love to see someone nail him down to one or other.
 
And you know this for a fact how exactly?

Because as I posted above it's taken from a tweet by the der Spiegel writer.

City aren't contesting the emails being real, Soriano even referred to them as hacked and stolen, so he's confirmed they are real.
 
The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact that ADUG didn't pay.

It would just be nice to see them explain the conflict. FairSkies proves Executive Committee paid, email says ADUG...the only conclusion is that the email is wrong and not a record of what happened.

But will they ever admit that?


And as this email is in ASCII text and NOT a facsimile copy this wouldn’t even be allowed in court as the chances of it being altered are extremely high.

Should not even be allowed as evidence and I suspect the club evidence that UEFA ignored included a copy of the original email which showed the correct funding sources.
 
Why , you think Scotlands a far away place, think some fans based further into Scotland than me have season tickets. Is an opinion better if you go to 20 games or 7 ?

No just asking to see if you had a season ticket seen as though you seemed to be critical of me giving up my season ticket in your original post.

Also, I suppose it's relevant to your views on VAR because if you never go to a game, chances are that VAR's going to be much less of a problem for you than it would be for someone who goes week-in, week-out.
 
Looks bad but if ultimately the Abu Dhabi Exec Committee underwrote the deal which is what is now believed even by our media detractors then how the funds are routed through from the UAE to the owner is really unimportant....unless someone has an argument about related parties.

Are UEFA expecting us to believe that City agreed a stadium and shirt sponsorship deal for £8m? That's clearly nonsense.
 
No just asking to see if you had a season ticket seen as though you seemed to be critical of me giving up my season ticket in your original post.

Also, I suppose it's relevant to your views on VAR because if you never go to a game, chances are that VAR's going to be much less of a problem for you than it would be for someone who goes week-in, week-out.
I watch at home and i hate var,they hardly show the var check anymore,they used to show every check in detail but now they don't bother,one thing is clear though that sky and bt can see the var feed and tell us what the result is before the ref tells us,it's all wrong
 
Well he's written the article using the Open Skies leak

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ip-covered-by-abu-dhabi-government-not-etihad

I suppose you could argue he's not presenting it as definite fact in the paper, only detailing the leaked email, but IIRC he was more certain in his language on twitter.

Either way both cannot be true, and I'd love to see someone nail him down to one or other.

I don't think Conn has done anything more than lift Colin's find and then present it as his own work, with zero commitment to acting upon the discrepancies of the Open Skies document and this hacked email.

We have never denied the emails, only that they were taken out of context.

I think what is more worrying is that ADUG are mentioned by name, no ambiguity, unless it has been doctored.

Which email concerns HH?

Which still leaves us posing the question what City have or have not yet presented which is irrefutable?

It can only be the paper trail showing the money going from ADEC to Etihad?

Can ADEC give it to ADUG directly?
 
The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact that ADUG didn't pay.

It would just be nice to see them explain the conflict. FairSkies proves Executive Committee paid, email says ADUG...the only conclusion is that the email is wrong and not a record of what happened.

But will they ever admit that?


If that email is true and obviously City will be aware of that, apart from the very strong procedural arguments we'll be making, I'm guessing the main substantive argument will be that it doesn't matter where Etihad gets its money from (question for the accountants)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top