Yes although maybe City had some guide from the conduct of the hearing.It is being widely reported that nobody associated with City knew the decision on Friday. Same at UEFA's side. It was genuinely given to both parties yesterday morning a couple of hours before it was published. That's kinda mental. We really did take a 'shit or bust' approach with this case.
Looking forward to the full judgment and Stefan's analysis of it. Will be interesting to see what it says, but my bet is it'll say more or less that everything in the leaks pre 2014 the panel simply couldn't look at, and the only post 2014 issue was the Etihad sponsorship deal which UEFA were never going to be able to prove anything about.
In the end it really was as simple as a lot of us thought it would be at the start in terms of what the main issues at play were.
Try reading all my posts before flying off the handle. I don’t believe it is possible have even ‘alleged offences’.ALLEGED offences.
CAS will have looked at our assertion that they couldn't reopen something that was beyond UEFAs own self imposed 5 year limit, they would have then set them aside without even considering them. Believe it or not, that doesn't make us guilty.
Some of them of course weren't time limited and CAS stated that they weren't self funded, therefore the implication is that the time barred stuff would also have passed muster.
You're buying into the media and opposing fans way of thinking.
Well there were other charges that were not time barred and CAS ruled that there was no evidence that we had done anything wrong. That may very well have been the same for the incidents they were unable to rule on.
I wonder where Ian Cheeseman got his info from? He's a top bloke with loads of connections within the club and probably not many within CAS. Anyway he called it correctly.It is being widely reported that nobody associated with City knew the decision on Friday. Same at UEFA's side. It was genuinely given to both parties yesterday morning a couple of hours before it was published. That's kinda mental. We really did take a 'shit or bust' approach with this case.
Looking forward to the full judgment and Stefan's analysis of it. Will be interesting to see what it says, but my bet is it'll say more or less that everything in the leaks pre 2014 the panel simply couldn't look at, and the only post 2014 issue was the Etihad sponsorship deal which UEFA were never going to be able to prove anything about.
In the end it really was as simple as a lot of us thought it would be at the start in terms of what the main issues at play were.
ALLEGED offences.
CAS will have looked at our assertion that they couldn't reopen something that was beyond UEFAs own self imposed 5 year limit, they would have then set them aside without even considering them. Believe it or not, that doesn't make us guilty.
Some of them of course weren't time limited and CAS stated that they weren't self funded, therefore the implication is that the time barred stuff would also have passed muster.
You're buying into the media and opposing fans way of thinking.
The anti-city media said it is a big reason.I’m as pleased as shit with the outcome. But let’s not forget a big reason is that the clock ran down on some offences so the club has to learn from and avoid those mistakes.
EDITED to add. I think the whole FFP was a Pulling The Ladder Up exercise by Old Money and should be abolished.
Never mind eh, I'm sure the cabel have had plenty of time to get the media believing their version rather than City once again being able to use their own rules against them.It is being widely reported that nobody associated with City knew the decision on Friday. Same at UEFA's side. It was genuinely given to both parties yesterday morning a couple of hours before it was published. That's kinda mental. We really did take a 'shit or bust' approach with this case.
Looking forward to the full judgment and Stefan's analysis of it. Will be interesting to see what it says, but my bet is it'll say more or less that everything in the leaks pre 2014 the panel simply couldn't look at, and the only post 2014 issue was the Etihad sponsorship deal which UEFA were never going to be able to prove anything about.
In the end it really was as simple as a lot of us thought it would be at the start in terms of what the main issues at play were.
All in all a pretty good end to the season is this, and the mouthwatering prospect
of the Rags not getting 4th has added to the joy. All I need now is Kelly Brook
ringing up asking if I'd like a blow job, and the lottery coming up, and it'll be
a fucking belter of a week.
The Athletic has been behind on the story for the last two years. They still haven't caught up.Just ref when City got the news, article in the Athletic today says it was 1hr before.
"City’s most senior figures only discovered the verdict an hour before its public announcement and the five men pictured are understood to have taken in the news together when the call came in from Switzerland."
Amongst the millions of posts yesterday before the judgement I reread the update from the CAS about the judgement, partly to pass the time, and posted that it seemed to indicate the parties would actually find out on Monday, when you look at the wording.It is being widely reported that nobody associated with City knew the decision on Friday. Same at UEFA's side. It was genuinely given to both parties yesterday morning a couple of hours before it was published. That's kinda mental. We really did take a 'shit or bust' approach with this case.
Looking forward to the full judgment and Stefan's analysis of it. Will be interesting to see what it says, but my bet is it'll say more or less that everything in the leaks pre 2014 the panel simply couldn't look at, and the only post 2014 issue was the Etihad sponsorship deal which UEFA were never going to be able to prove anything about.
In the end it really was as simple as a lot of us thought it would be at the start in terms of what the main issues at play were.
It is being widely reported that nobody associated with City knew the decision on Friday. Same at UEFA's side. It was genuinely given to both parties yesterday morning a couple of hours before it was published. That's kinda mental. We really did take a 'shit or bust' approach with this case.
Looking forward to the full judgment and Stefan's analysis of it. Will be interesting to see what it says, but my bet is it'll say more or less that everything in the leaks pre 2014 the panel simply couldn't look at, and the only post 2014 issue was the Etihad sponsorship deal which UEFA were never going to be able to prove anything about.
In the end it really was as simple as a lot of us thought it would be at the start in terms of what the main issues at play were.
Yes although maybe City had some guide from the conduct of the hearing.
I hope the media look into the UEFA investigatory process. How could they have prosecuted this case? It does seem to be a strong case of club bias overwhelming the regulatory process, and that really should not happen.
I am glad now that City went through the CAS process because for the first time we can say to the rest of football you were wrong, and you have been proven to be wrong. It was a draining process for us all.
'Flying off the handle'? You must be a delicate flower if that's what you think my post was, perhaps you're just a bit miffed at some of the alerts you're getting for a not very well thought out post.Try reading all my posts before flying off the handle. I don’t believe it is possible have even ‘alleged offences’.
if a game is rigged explicitly against you, you cannot by definition cheat.
However if you continue playing the game with the same rigged rules and likely to be under even more intense scrutiny you have to be clever about it.
Plasma screens? **** is stuck in the 90’s.@karen7 is famous on RAWK:
“But the thing is, the bald one has to replace Silva, Fernandinho and Aguero, and find a centre half to fill Kompany’s boots. He might fool the Karen7’s of this world that Foden is the new Messi, but he needs big money to get in replacements. And without Champions league, he is going to need bigger wages to convince star players to sit at home watching CL on their 96” plasma screens”
There were no PL FFP rules before 2015 anyway.Let’s hope that it wasn’t just a time bar as the PL doesn’t have one. So far it looks like it wasn’t just a time issue. Who is to say the time barred ones would have been lost or won anyway.
He has been good on this since last Christmas. Before that he, and the Times, were swallowing the UEFA line and were one of the recipients of leaks. I believe that they eventually realised they were being used to spread misinformation and since then their coverage has been mostly balanced and accurate. One of the leaks (from UEFA) about City facing a ban was shortly before Ceferin's trip to the Etihad. I don't think that was a co-incidence.Times probably. Ziegler's generally been good on this
Let’s hope that it wasn’t just a time bar as the PL doesn’t have one. So far it looks like it wasn’t just a time issue. Who is to say the time barred ones would have been lost or won anyway.
Wonder where they nick them fromPlasma screens? **** is stuck in the 90’s.