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

Big Chap said:
Just sent this to the Times. Will achieve nothing, but feel better now.......

Good afternoon,

Your sport’s correspondent’s article published today at noon titled “Uefa weakened in battle against wealthy clubs....” was ignorant of the facts of the case against Manchester City, and was a disappointingly myopic take on the subject.

Time-barring was only one element that the CAS verdict referred to. More pressing was the fact that the allegations against Manchester City were in relation to matters that were the subject of an earlier investigation and punishment. But Mr Winter does not feel that this element is worthy of comment.

It is a tired trope to accuse Manchester City of benefiting from the wealth of the owners, having been fully compliant with the flawed FFP regulations since that time. I appreciate that the Times is a business, and your articles need to generate clicks from readers who will enjoy an article bashing the most successful English club over the last decade.

But Mr Winter’s supercilious tone, without acknowledging the facts of the case, leaves a bad taste. An apology would be too much to ask for, but I ask that you recommend to your Chief Football Writer that he bothers to investigate the facts of topics that he chooses to opine on. After all, that’s what journalists are supposed to do, isn’t it?
Click to expand...
Good man.

Very articulately put.
 
Facebook is full of " you we're fined, you are still guilty, you just paid them off " brigade.
Funny as fcuk
 
We're a successful professionally ran club with no debt, have pumped money into Manchester improving the local community, grassroots football etc. We're guilty of wanting to be successful and are hated because we dared disturb the pack.

You've got United over the road, with owners who have took money out of the club to build shopping centres or whatever in America, all while being in debt. They're allowed to go out and spend 80 odd million on shite centre halves and do what the fuck they want. Why are we the pantomime villains, why are teams like that not being looked at? it can't be healthy if your owners taking money out of football even if it is as a 'loan'

I might be talking utter shite here, but I just don't understand it.
 
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...
Fuck me, a sensible post on r/soccer ?
 
Len Rum said:
Not really that 'balanced' mate.
Said he would wait for the full report to come out before commenting, particularly wrt time barred elements.
But the point is this - the judgement says we have not violated FFP and if some elements were timed out so what?
It's not up to City to act against their own interests and request they be 'untimed' out.
Fcuks sake.
We are innocent and he got it wrong, end of.
Had he studied the facts of the case properly as many on here did , he would have realised there was a possibility of timed out elements to the case.
He didn't.
Click to expand...
Just because there were some elements which were time barred why should anyone think we were guilty of deceipt in that period either.
It just means UEFA were guilty of incompetence,vindictiveness and stupidity in not realising it.
 
deano ou812 said:
The cnut should be called out to explain why he thinks this and remind the bbc that they are supposedly a impartial organisation clearly that’s not the case,the cnut should have been sacked after his remarks about the Leicester city owner ...
Click to expand...
A few people today have mentioned the Leicester City owner, what did he say? Missed it back then.
 
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