CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

It could have been 10 said:
Not got time to read through every post so apologies if already done:-

Miguel Delaney, Rob & Nick Harris, Ian Ladyman, Dan Roam, David Conn, Ian Herbert, Steve Bates, Neil Custis, Mr Tebas, Karl Heinz Rumenigge, Alan Shearer, David Gill, Rick Parry

ARE YOU ALL LISTENING

YOU GUYS TOOK ONE HELL OF A BEATING.
Click to expand...

Nick Harris blocked me just for tweeting the CAS key finding at him. You can feel the RAGE. I love dishing it out to these odious twats.
 
aguerooooo said:
Herbert WHAT A FUCKING LIBERTY i can smell his boiled piss from hear
Click to expand...

I think it's because he knows he won't be coming back to the Etihad in the future.

Prior to lockdown, there were 'people' coming to the press box and asking after him.

Coward was forced to put his hood up. Apparently they were also waiting on the route he would take from the CFA media centre to the press entrance at the ground.

We can only take a dim view of such behaviour.
 
Stolen from r/soccer, posted by a Bayern Munich fan ...

"They didn't make any mockery of UEFA. UEFA were pressured by the football elite to recharge them with a violation for which they had already charged and punished them in 2014. CAS rejected UEFA's new charges and any other legal court would too. I would love to see UEFA and people like Tebas to take this to Swiss Courts only to be rejected there as well. These new charges from before 2014 won't stand in any court of law.
As far as UEFA are concerned, City's compliant with FFP since 2014 and their current income are real with all the TV money, CL money and new sponsorship money. The days that UEFA can charge them for fake sponsorships are over. They are now among the clubs that many global sponsors are interested to advertise with because of global coverage they get and new fans they make around the world."
 
Having watched various news programmes today as well as keeping an eye on twitter etc the overwhelming narrative from the journos seems to be that we somehow 'got away with it'.

Most are leading with the fact that we still have to pay a fine, as if that is related to breaching FFP without qualifying the fact that the fine relates to being uncooperative and obstructing a UEFA investigation.

CAS found in our favour, so surely that proves exactly why we were uncooperative towards UEFA? We knew we didn't have a case and today's decision vindicates that belief. If a fine to UEFA is the price we have to pay for such an important victory, its money well spent!
 
HarrytheBlue said:
Dan Roan wasn't fair at all. He finished his report by making out that City weren't completely exonerated. We were absolutely exonerated - the fine was because we refused to cooperate with a panel we didn't trust.
Click to expand...
That was the nearest he has got to explaining things tho , of course he had to put a bit of vinegar in at the end, but undoubtedly someone has had a word with him this afternoon because that broadcast at 6pm was chalk n cheese from his 1pm broadcast .
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
On the evidence of the number of posts which clearly have not understood the CAS decision, the fucking level of media/journalism is an absolute disgrace and shambles, littered with inaccuracy, outright lies and total bias.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Most of them haven't read the bit at the top which says "Manchester City did not....", NOT being important. Then they assume that "alleged breaches .... were not established" seems to mean that they were committed but despite heroic efforts by UEFA they were foiled by City's refusal to provide them with the key evidence! And time barred means that working against unreasonable time constraints UEFA were foiled by another treacherous City plot, not by the fact that this was UEFA's third go at nailing City and all they could come up with was 3 tatty emails that were apparently destroyed by City's team.

As an aside, I don't think UEFA can take any solace from CAS's comments on their evidence, which was "unsatisfactory", "inadequate" and didn't "establish" that such breaches had occurred. When a court gives that as part of a decision they are really asking "what are you wasting our time for with this crap?". Similarly, on the time barred aspect, that was not a consolation to UEFA because their meaning was, "this isn't the first time a case has been lost because of your statute of limitations and yet you come back too late with a useless case - and they're your bloody rules and you don't even understand your own bloody rules." I think UEFA got a real bloody nose today - no wonder there were no leaks. How could they let the scousers down like that!
 
The so called “failure to cooperate” charge is the peg our enemies can hang their shabby coats on.
Anyone with a minuscule amount of sense and or objectivity would surely think maybe the reason City didn’t cooperate with Uefa was the shitty way UEFA and mates smeared our club and leaked what should have been private information to all and sundry.

It seems to me the UEFA case was rushed to dip under the five year limitation since our 2014 agreement, it was based on out of context hacked material and was never going to succeed.
The reaction of the MSM is nothing short of a disgrace but not unexpected.
hopefully that Yves Latreen twat is having a nice day.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I know this has been covered but for my benefit can someone explain again please. I thought anything over 5 years old had already been investigated, we had paid our pinch and been released by the settlement agreement. So why is this 'time barring' not a red herring because we had already 'done our time' for any breaches that occurred more than five years ago.
Click to expand...

Having a listen to this it’s very good at explaining.
https://m.soundcloud.com/9320pod/the-9320-podcast-cas-special
 
shroom said:
Stolen from r/soccer, posted by a Bayern Munich fan ...

"They didn't make any mockery of UEFA. UEFA were pressured by the football elite to recharge them with a violation for which they had already charged and punished them in 2014. CAS rejected UEFA's new charges and any other legal court would too. I would love to see UEFA and people like Tebas to take this to Swiss Courts only to be rejected there as well. These new charges from before 2014 won't stand in any court of law.
As far as UEFA are concerned, City's compliant with FFP since 2014 and their current income are real with all the TV money, CL money and new sponsorship money. The days that UEFA can charge them for fake sponsorships are over. They are now among the clubs that many global sponsors are interested to advertise with because of global coverage they get and new fans they make around the world."
Click to expand...
Brave, I can see Hoeness hunting down that Bayern fan!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top