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

Tommy_Catons_Perm said:
Kitson says City dragged there heels, the time bar is nonsense and he does not even understand why there is a time bar.

I thought it was UEFA rules that set the time bar limit of 5 years. I thought the charges related to 2012-2016, so mostly over 5 years ago. Why is this idiot Kitson so obtuse?
Click to expand...

Still wants his minute of fame despite his unremarkable professional career
 
To me it feels the whole FFP battle is only a part of a bigger war, and the reason that we are not being left alone to enjoy our victory is that that war is still going on.

American owners (plus those getting fat from the unchallenged dominance of certain 'historical' European Clubs) want to be able to make profits AND take them out.

Our owners want to make a Capital Profit and to do this they are happy (and can afford to) leave profits and cash in business in order to build something bigger and of more value. That is what they mean by saying we are funded by a sovereign state. We don't bring in as much money as the Rags but our owners don't take anything out or service huge debt

If you think back there used to be lots of fans moaning that their club/owners wouldn't spend the money needed to win the League (Arsenal, Rags Green and Yellow protest, Dippers complaining about their previous owners etc. etc). Now they just blame City being able to spend more and their fans are dumb enough and partisan enough to hate on City rather than demand their owners spend the necessary cash to compete. They make it sound like the Sheikh is constantly pumping cash in, but the reality is that he is just not taking it out like they are.

With Covid the American owners are even more fixated on being to be able to draw money out of the clubs they always intended to be cash cows. At the same time many of those clubs are the biggest losers from fans being kept away and match day revenue disappearing. They know that City don't have debt or dividends to service and they are scared of what happens in the future they don't match our investment. They are talking about our future dominance if they can't stop us, not the current position.

Hence the desperation to smear and distract their own fans and the desire to use the media to cover up their own greed and lack of vision. Until now having more money than everyone else was a get out of jail free card for these clubs no matter how badly run they were. Just buy a big name player when the fans got too loud. They are struggling to keep up with us already and are desperate to disguise their own failings and poor business model as the fault of big bad City. Their fans and the press are dumb enough to let them get away with it and they have to keep shovelling ever more putrid shit on the fire to create a bigger and smellier smokescreen!
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
We can't contest the fine because we are guilty of non-cooperation. We did it deliberately and even issued a press release explaining why we did it. It was a brlliant tactical move but we have to take the rap. It was a price worth paying. You can't expect CAS to issue a ruling encouraging other clubs to refuse to co-operate with their controlling body. CAS reduced the fine from £27m because they recognised why City did it.
Click to expand...
This is what I see as the key point about the fine. CAS are the appeal and arbitration court for a multitude of sports. The governance of those sports depends on the appropriate governing bodies having rules and regs and their members agreeing to abide by the rules and to cooperate with an investigation if there's a suspected breach of those rules - without that you'd have near-anarchy in some sports. CAS had to bear in mind the wider implications if they decided not to punish City at all on the non-cooperation charge. I agree that CAS probably understood the reasons for not cooperating and reflected that by cutting the fine to 10m.
 
Tommy_Catons_Perm said:
Kitson says City dragged there heels, the time bar is nonsense and he does not even understand why there is a time bar.

I thought it was UEFA rules that set the time bar limit of 5 years. I thought the charges related to 2012-2016, so mostly over 5 years ago. Why is this idiot Kitson so obtuse?
Click to expand...

“He doesn’t even understand” - we’ll why his he invited, never mind why did he actually accept, the platform to speak on the matter?
 
Keeper! said:
Bankrupt footballer Paul Kitson accused of blowing £25,000 on betting rather than paying debts
The ex-Premier League striker, 47, was declared bust 12 months ago after at least two businesses failed
Click to expand...

wrong bloke.
The twat in the video is Dave Kitson.
 
Jacko1956 said:
Defo we were given a 2 year ban expecting it be reduced to 1 which was job done for our name and brand to be permanently damaged !
Click to expand...
I'd say we were given a 2-season ban to take us out of the game, as it would have cost us probably close to £250m over those 2 years and probably another 2 or 3 at least beyond that to recovery anything like the state we are now, if we ever would. That was the price of avoiding a breakaway of the G-14.
 
domalino said:
Look, it has played out. The entire footballing world held their breath over the weekend when it was announced the decision was coming on Monday, and then they got their explanation spoon fed to them and they've moved on from "what happened?" mode.

The full award would need to include sections on why Rick Parry was dancing naked during the CAS hearing screaming racist nursery rhymes to recapture the attention of the audience and make them pay attention again and change their minds.

I'm not hysterical, i'm not even that miserable, just resigned to the fact the club's not controlled this well and that regardless of the intricacies of why we didn't get banned, it's a huge PR defeat.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but that last paragraph is complete bollocks
 
Didsbury Dave said:
You lot getting your knickers in a twist about the odd shitty irrelevant pundit’s take on this is pretty funny.

We won. Much of the narrative since has been positive. It will get more positive when the full judgement is released. City have put Pep into bat nicely and there will be more leaks/releases through the right channels in time, I’m sure.

We as a club have behaved with dignity throughout and have the spoils.
Click to expand...

At long last a post of sense and perspective to counter some of the paranoid dross we've been treated to. There seems to have been an attack of almost collective amnesia. Let me remind everyone that in the last ten years our club, little citeh, the national laughing stock have won 4 PL titles, 4 league cups and 2 FA cups (as well as runners up once) and we can throw in 3 community shields. I think that's all but we've won so many I lose count! Off the pitch things are at least as good. Sheikh Mansour bought the club in 2008 for £90 million and paid off the debts. Revenue was about £79 million pa. He has invested some £1.5 billion just in City and (say) £1 billion in the other members of the group, although I suspect that's an overestimate. City's own revenue stands at over half a billion a year. The CFG now has major investment from American and Chinese conglomerates and is worth - not valued but made worth, by actual investment - $5.5 billion. That represents a pretty hefty return for the Sheikh, but it also means City have little to fear if "the Sheikh walks away". I reckon that's a pretty good decade as decades go at City!

And what's happened to our rivals, the awesome cartel? Stony broke, borrowing right left and centre and hardly a trophy between the lot of them and so desperate they have to rely on a set of ready bent rules to ruin us. But we are not the little guys here. We don't need to break their rules to win. Khaldoon tells them that any independent court will rule in our favour, and it does. And any rules which are bent enough to hurt us will absolutely destroy them. The only thing they can do is to pick up their bat and wickets and go and play somewhere else with their own little gang.

So, for god's sake let's shut up about City being passive and supine, taking everything the cartel throw at us. At the moment the cartel are flat on the canvas and he ref's checking VAR to make sure he's actually said "ten".
 
Newman Noggs said:
As regards the "time-barring" comments in the media, I'd point out that the time restrictions placed on enforcement action aren't just random time limits self-imposed for no reason, they are there to reflect Article 6 of the EHCR, the right to a fair trial and, in particular, the right to have your hearing held within "a reasonable time". The fact that UEFA decided that the principles of the right to a fair trial don't apply to City and that it should over-ride its own rules tells its own story.
Click to expand...
Limitation periods are also there to provide certainty and finality to parties.
 
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