This is my query. UEFA say we mislead the auditors and this was not in the spirit of the rules (however bent they may be). We are being charged regarding breach of these rules. I don’t think the law comes into it? I assume CAS are ruling on our actions in respect of these rules not the rules themselves. That would need a court of law.I think that is pretty much their claim. But its nonsensical in law and accounting so surely has to fail.
Actually, on the very last point I disagree, and this may well be the crux of everything. IMO CAS have to rule on the rules, not on the emotions that the emails can evoke in people. The question is are UEFA within their own rules in a) using the leaks to re-try a previously settled case AND b) if they are, do the leaks prove clearly that the UEFA's rules were broken.
Khaldoon and Simon Pearce are not little guys. Soriano and Begiristain are little guys. And the confidence and bullishness isn't coming from the little guys. Khaldoon and Pearce simply wouldn't take that stance without strong advice that they were on solid ground. The ramifications of being wrong are pretty severe on every level. It's not like they're privately saying to the players "this could go either way" - every single one of them has been told that the club will be 100% vindicated. That's a balls out strategy if you're playing with a weak hand.
A win's a win, and we will win.
I don't quite get how a reduction of the ban can be an option. We're either guilty or not right? If we're guilty and CAS agree we'll get the two year ban, and if not, we get cleared. Unless i'm missing something here? I don't think City stand to gain anything by accepting a one year ban. It's all or nothing.
Now where have I heard that before?I don't quite get how a reduction of the ban can be an option. We're either guilty or not right? If we're guilty and CAS agree we'll get the two year ban, and if not, we get cleared. Unless i'm missing something here? I don't think City stand to gain anything by accepting a one year ban. It's all or nothing.
Please please please let this happen
I hope the gloves aren't Edersons as they're massiveOJ got off and all Johnny Cochrane needed was a pair of shrunken gloves!
OJ got off and all Johnny Cochrane needed was a pair of shrunken gloves!
I hope the gloves aren't Edersons as they're massive
For this situation law means relevant rules and laws (and CAS does consider laws btw).This is my query. UEFA say we mislead the auditors and this was not in the spirit of the rules (however bent they may be). We are being charged regarding breach of these rules. I don’t think the law comes into it? I assume CAS are ruling on our actions in respect of these rules not the rules themselves. That would need a court of law.
Yeah, but he's been guilty ever since and that's not even a partisan view.
City likely to ask for a specific consideration of proportionality if their other arguments fail so there is a way in which 2 years can become 1. I think unlikely thoughI don't quite get how a reduction of the ban can be an option. We're either guilty or not right? If we're guilty and CAS agree we'll get the two year ban, and if not, we get cleared. Unless i'm missing something here? I don't think City stand to gain anything by accepting a one year ban. It's all or nothing.
That's my point, guilty or not, City are guilty in the court of public opinion.
OJ took the win even if everyone knew he was a murdering fucker.
Yes, but I want us to win because we did nothing wrong, not because we were actually guilty and "got out of dodge"
I don't care what Dippers and rags think, I care if we come out of it with legitimate guilt attached because whilst the media and certain clubs hate us I know plenty of fans of other clubs who think it's a nonsense, but that changes if some actual guilt emerges.