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

[citymantop]

Good spot that lady Bob am wondering if thats actionable.

If City are going to do anything about it they better get a move on in case it is time barred.

 

[Blueprint Blue]

I know it’s fuck all use.but, for what it’s worth this is what I have said in my complaint to the BBC:

I just wanted to say as a usually vociferous advocate of the BBC - which ought to be a cherished unbiased institution., I am utterly despondent at the coverage of the CAS findings between UEFA and Manchester City FC. Someone reading that piece would understand the exact opposite of the truth. Though I strongly suspect that the sad ,unfettered partisanship and tribalism in football is at the root of it, as well as the need for the “click bait” nature of modern , online “churnalism”. Anyway it is clearly biased and it is evident not a modicum of research of the actual document released by CAS has taken place - given it is 93 pages long and the speed at which this witless drivel was published. Suggesting it was “oven ready “ for the report’s release. Truth is there that an English Football club ( the most successful English football club of the last decade) was accused of financial manipulation to circumvent rules on the basis of emails (stolen) which have since been proven to have been , let’s be kind and call it - manipulated. Additionally the key finding isn’t that Manchester City have been fined for not complying.. (with a kangaroo court which was leaking like a sieve ) but rather , that Manchester City Football club was found to have NOT been guilty of circumventing said rules . Anyway in short I have loved the BBC for many decades, but frankly you have failed us all. This piece of badly researched , tribalist, click baiting , pandering to the masses , utterly myopic unbalanced , lacking in depth and nuance- tripe cannot go unchallenged. It in my opinion contravenes the BBC convention on balance and fairness . Thanks for the memories Aunty Beeb, you have let yourself go though if this is anything to measure the current journalistic “stature” by. Select the best category to describe your complaintBiasDo you require a response to your complaint?Yes

10 minutes of your life you're never getting back mate.

 

[slbsn]

We know where the additional funding (the so-called "central resources") really came from. It came from the Executive Council/Crown Prince Court but they couldn't admit that obviously. But the crucial point is it wasn't Sheikh Mansour/ADUG. That seems to have been comprehensively demonstrated to CAS's satisfaction. You always maintained that if Etihad were contracted to pay us £x and they paid us £x then there was no case to answer. But you also maintained that it didn't matter where Etihad got that money from.

This judgement shows that the core part of UEFA's case was that this was disguised equity investment. You were absolutely right about the time-barred stuff (although CAS upheld UEFA's right to revisit the settlement agreement) but the issue of disguised equity investment, and therefore the source of the Etihad funds, was always the key to this.

On another point, I notice Conn takes the very disingenouous line that the Etisalat agreement wasn't signed until 2015 but was backdated to 2012, ignoring the fact that the original Heads of Agreement for that arrangement was signed in Feb 2010. I'd be interested on your view of that.

It doesn't do our credibility any good to say "they couldn't admit that obviously." The ADUG/SM source couldn't be proved - it was UEFA's burden and they could never hope to jump the witness statements (without cross examination) and letters on these points.

I thought that the sections on the settlement agreement were a little unconvincing - arguing the subject matter was different (para 154 says "these specific charges do not touch upon the issues addressed in the SA") is tenuous but, of course, arguable. These are all quite nuanced things.

The Etisalat was not backdated - it was signed and dated January 2015 but with an effective date earlier. That is, as Conn knows, not the same thing. Moreover the Heads were binding and specifically envisaged being in place prior to the full signed agreement. So I agree it is disingenuous.

Looking at the judgment, it is possible that if UEFA could have shown a more direct link to subsidies from ADUG/SM then they would have disagreed with me as to the importance of the legal sponsor contract and could well have found in UEFA's favour. In essence, that would have been a finding that the legal contract was a sham. Yet again a serious allegation with a high standard of proof that it was always likely UEFA couldn't hit.

 

[Gingers Dad]

Fucking Newcastle ?

Current owners will be in favour of ffp it takes pressure off them to invest

 

[TheCentralScrutinizer]

We’re not scousers mate

Even so........

 

[Goatmeal]

I wonder what would have happened if the CAS hearing was not heard in time and we were not in the draw.
Would not surprise me if we were still excluded and left to fight for financial compensation. UEFA stating draw and fixtures already been agreed.
Would have just dragged on

 

[Gordyola]

Thanks mate, I’ve just submitted my complaint.

BBC Sport have consistently misreported the outcomes of the case in the Court for Arbitration for Sport (CAS) of UEFA vs Manchester City FC. City, who were exonerated of all charges of financial manipulation. Your headline reads as though City were found guilty so please investigate this bias. Also, a couple of weeks earlier when the Court Judgment was first announced, your sports reporter on breakfast TV mocked Pep Guardiola, the most successful manager of the last decade, whilst passing no comment on criticisms by rival managers. I don’t expect my BBC licence fee to pay for disinformation, bias and tribal reporting to suit rival sports fans. I also question why in this era of BLM protests, your reporters attack the only English trophy winning Club with an Arab owner. Please provide me with answers.

They don’t read it more than enough to see the subject to which they will have constructed a standard reply Firstly they thank you then they assure you of no bias then they thank you again and assure you, again, that it’s been include in the daily information to all editors etc who of course never read it However be sure to follow it up as you are not satisfied with the reply then they take it more serious

 

[Tim of the Oak]

10 minutes of your life you're never getting back mate.

If the BBC get a few dozen complaints, nothing will change. If they get tens of thousands of complaints we might see improvements.

It’s easy to sit on your arse complaining about the doers.

 

[Kun T. B. Horlocks]

It makes me laugh that CAS makes it clear that Der Spiegel were very selective about what they published, that being just 6 of 5.5m documents. And one of those was 2 emails they'd shamefully stitched together to give (as CAS said) a distorted view.

Yet not one of our fearless guardians of the truth in the media is prepared to call them out over this but -equally shamefully - they're all trying to outdo each other in being highly and often maliciously selective in what they print.

Utter lying vermin the lot of them.

Think I would prefer the adverbial "shamelessly" to "shamefully" PB

 

[rickmcfc]

Maybe I'm over-reacting but with the way journalists have been allowed to write their headlines/articles today, completely disregarding the overwhelming findings by CAS in favour of painting City in a bad light yet again... I think our media/pr department isn't fit for purpose.

Having a quiet word with journalists to slightly change a headline really isn't working.

I completely agree.
City should released a statement first thing this morning now the final report has been released, and make it very clear that we have been cleared. From this point onwards anything written to reject this, will be taken further and those individuals who do continue to write this bullshit will be banned from all mcfc activities for a 5 year period.
Get it done city show some fucking backbone

 

[give it to gordon]

The thing is with the fine and the fact that the bbc lead with it yesterday making it sound like we got of etc.

If an organisation is bent, leaking to the press ever 5 minutes about what crimes City are supposed to be breaking , leaking the ban before the case had started City had no choice but to not cooperate. This should be the major story here as to why England most successful club over the last 8 years had so little confidence in UEFA to be fair.
City were proven right, and I believe had City cooperated with UEFA City would still have been ban. City had no choice but to go to CAS. If City are fined for non cooperation than UEFA should be fined for running a process which the club had little faith in and was leaking confidential information to the press.
Some times you have no choice but to take things to the next level.
The same as if City had hired private investors to catch the coach busters would City have reported to the Merseyside police ? I doubt it City would have gone higher because that police force were in leagues with the fans and shown to be incompetent.

 

[manchester blue]

This has probably been covered on here, but after Roan changed his stance slightly, daily mail have also changed theirs to 'overwhelmingly exonerated '. Club are clearly fighting back, just wish they'd go after the likes of the WhatsApp group and others.

I think they seem them as an irrelevance. If I didn’t come on here I would never have heard of any of them. Sporting Intelligence? Really?

I actually wish we would stop promoting their “work” through this site and help keep them irrelevant.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

The thing I am struggling with is what advantage we gained by not co-operating with the UEFA investigation? I have no doubt that even if we had then UEFA would have tried to make something stick but we still would have had the option to go to CAS for a de bono hearing.

UEFA may well have tried to expand their investigation into a general fishing trip but at that point we could have refused to co-operate further and I assume CAS would have backed that stance. We have still come away from CAS with a substantial fine and, more importantly, we have been censured for non-co-operation thereby giving the media ammunition to infer that we were hiding something.

 

[Blueprint Blue]

If the BBC get a few dozen complaints, nothing will change. If they get tens of thousands of complaints we might see improvements.

It’s easy to sit on your arse complaining about the doers.

Not going to get tens of thousands though are they? I genuinely think they receive these complaints from city fans and snigger and chortle to each other at how pathetic we are and how they've wound us up again.

Accept that we will never be accepted. It will make all the trophies we win much more sweeter.

 

[remember arthur mann]

If it's Roan, there'll be a long queue to assist in severely traumatising the c*nt.

Same thoughts too, should be an all out effort to put these bastards in the bottom block !

 

[kippax4ever]

Dan Roan re-tweeting Harris and Ziegler. He might have grudgingly reported the truth (eventually) on twitter but he's shown his true colours throughout this whole situation.

I watched Sky's coverage at 6pm and I thought they were very fair. They did mention the failure to comply with UEFA, but as a side point not the bulk of their report. They also called out that the hateful 8 for asking CAS to ignore our appeal for the ban to be suspended when we never made that appeal.

So we didn't get banned.
We didn't kill anyone.
We got justice.innocent till proven guilty
Are you reading this you scouse vermin..

 

[Gazza]

If City won 22-1 against Liverpool at Anfield the press would report it as "City's leaky defence fails to keep a clean sheet again"

 

[roypaulknewmyfather]

If, like some of the media are trying to imply, the refusal to cooperate was so severe, why was the fine reduced? Surely it would have been increased? Biased, illiterate uneducated tossers springs to mind.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Not going to get tens of thousands though are they? I genuinely think they receive these complaints from city fans and snigger and chortle to each other at how pathetic we are and how they've wound us up again.

Accept that we will never be accepted. It will make all the trophies we win much more sweeter.

Someone said last night that there were 70k members of this forum so if only 1 in 10 complained the that would go a king way towards 10k.

You are right that we won’t be accepted by the existing cartel but let’s not give them an easy ride.

 

[Ban-jani]

Not going to get tens of thousands though are they? I genuinely think they receive these complaints from city fans and snigger and chortle to each other at how pathetic we are and how they've wound us up again.

Accept that we will never be accepted. It will make all the trophies we win much more sweeter.

Hopefully Bozo disbands the paedophilia protecting thunder****s.

Then I’ll turn up when their sports department are leaving the office after redundancy and I’ll laugh.