Bbc sport headline City show “blatant disregard” to uefa
The impartial BBC. Absolute disgrace.
It’s hardly surprising the Germans and Spanish hate us, the media in our own country do. Where else does that happen?Bbc sport headline City show “blatant disregard” to uefa
Seeing as City are completely innocent and the evidence against us was stolen and doctored why havent costs been awarded us. City are innocent UEFA should be paying our defence fees.
I'm no lawyer and I've only skim-read the full document but it wouldn't surprise me if we now appealed that fine. I've heard we took legal advice before refusing to co-operate, therefore we must feel there were legal grounds for our failure to provide the evidence UEFA asked for. And the CAS judgement says that UEFA's AC failed to ask for the evidence again.
Well there’s a surprise!No name to the article...
Bbc sport headline City show “blatant disregard” to uefa
Got this from City_Xtra
"CAS Report: "UEFA wishes to add that it considers MCFC to be a very important participant to UEFA club competitions. It welcomes all the good which MCFC has brought to the football world and it welcomes significant investments made by the club and its owners."
Really? Haha. What a fecking shambles. I hope there are grounds to sue Der Spiegel. Surely they have an obligation to apply some form of quality control in relation to 'primary source' information. Unless they manipulated the emails, which would surely give us grounds to pursue legal damages.
Obstructing a UEFA investigation, whether innocent or not, was deemed sufficiently worthy of a heavy fine, albeit reduced. 100,000 euros initial UEFA hearing costs also to be paid by City. CAS legal costs to be shared - not sure why.
We provided CAS with everything,we didn't to UEFA because they were not following due process and keep it all confidental,they were leaking like a sieveI've only skim read, but it came across that UEFA absolutely went to town on the charges and its insinuations about us, which doesn't bode well.
Am I right in concluding:
UEFA did follow due process, but both sides misinterpreted the deadline for time-barring.
City withheld evidence, the CAS panel took a dim view on it and didn't appear to recognise our legitimate reasoning.
It appears the additional evidence has almost completely disproved the substance of UEFA's charges. It also appears that any remaining commentary or accusations amounted to hearsay and hypotheticals with no substance.
The evidence and testimonies demonstrated that UEFA also had no reasonable evidence for any of the time-barred accusations, even though the CAS panel did not really make a full conclusion on this.
The original evidence was edited and misrepresented, and although City have not provided full unredacted access it is sufficient to dismiss UEFA's interpretation.
CAS acknowledged our concerns on the leaks, but as there is an ethics case outstanding refusing to take the matter further.
It is nonetheless clear that City did far more than "get off on a technicality" and actually, judging by the breakdown, had to defend itself far more than the media suspected as CAS did more of it as admissible than I initially expected.
Am I about right or can someone who has time to read it more thoroughly correct me?
Can’t wait for the BBC to be fucked off.
Fucking Paedos.
We provided CAS with everything,we didn't to UEFA because they were not following due process and keep it all confidental,they were leaking like a sieve
It’s actually comical.
Group chat at work is silent.
It was absolutely teeming when the ban was first announced.
The nauseas nine, the nasty nine. Any more?
No name to the article...