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

City Man said:
I find this very worrying. As the question implicitly asks potential respondents to locate and read the full CAS report, "digest" it and then carefully weigh up the material it contains before, presumably after careful and profound thought, give a considered view, the fact that 85% of respondents have done all this and voted as they have, is deeply troubling. I would have felt better if I thought there were knee-jerk, prejudiced reactions among the 85% but as the responses are clearly the product of rigorous intellectual thought, I am very depressed.
Click to expand...
And you think the respondent's actually read the 85 page report and digested it.
 
It was always can unsubstantiated slur to derail City. The whole episode should galvanise anybody becoming disenfranchised because they believe we made it. They loved us being shit. Be a winner and back the club and stop blubbering about playing Wycombe as if that was accepted.
 
domalino said:
I know it's Nick Harris but didn't CAS very specifically say

1) UEFA didn't prove the time barred stuff regardless of it being time barred or not.

2) The obstruction did not lead to us not being found guilty (ie it was irrelevant and this is backed up by the fact we supplied everything asked for the de novo CAS review of the case)?
Click to expand...
The time barred stuff was simply 2 of the earlier years of the Etihad sponsorship and they found no evidence of any wrongdoing regarding funding in the years that weren't time-barred.

Therefore it's a pretty safe bet that there was nothing in those earlier years that might have incriminated us.
 
domalino said:
I know it's Nick Harris but didn't CAS very specifically say

1) UEFA didn't prove the time barred stuff regardless of it being time barred or not.

2) The obstruction did not lead to us not being found guilty (ie it was irrelevant and this is backed up by the fact we supplied everything asked for the de novo CAS review of the case)?
Click to expand...

CAS actually said that if City had provided the evidence to UEFA that was presented at the CAS hearing, that UEFA may themselves have reached the same not proven decision
 
Quick question regarding the CAS panel. Did City choose a panel member and then suggest the chairman or, as I thought, was the chairman and the City nominee the same person and, as is the norm, both sides picked one each?
 
Bozzie said:
Quick question regarding the CAS panel. Did City choose a panel member and then suggest the chairman or, as I thought, was the chairman and the City nominee the same person and, as is the norm, both sides picked one each?
Click to expand...


The two sides agree to pick the chairman.
City as the defendant selected him and Uefa agreed with the selection

If they didn't agree,cas would have chosen the chairman.
 
domalino said:
I know it's Nick Harris but didn't CAS very specifically say

1) UEFA didn't prove the time barred stuff regardless of it being time barred or not.

2) The obstruction did not lead to us not being found guilty (ie it was irrelevant and this is backed up by the fact we supplied everything asked for the de novo CAS review of the case)?
Click to expand...

Not many non-City supporters will take the trouble to read the CAS report thoroughly. They will simply swallow the shit that twats like Harris spout , and just believe it to be the truth.
 
lust overlord said:
The two sides agree to pick the chairman.
City as the defendant selected him and Uefa agreed with the selection

If they didn't agree,cas would have chosen the chairman.
Click to expand...
Sorry to sound thick but, to be clear, City didn't effectively get to select 2 members of the panel, just who, out of the 3 would be chairman?
 
dickie davies said:
CAS actually said that if City had provided the evidence to UEFA that was presented at the CAS hearing, that UEFA may themselves have reached the same not proven decision
Click to expand...

Exactly this is a point i was making.

In many ways refusing to deal with Uefa has been a master stroke on our part, the two options were.
1. Assist the Uefa investigation knowing they were leaking information like a sieve and beholding to the whims of the G14.
2. With hold the information and allow the case to go to an independent respected body and then show the facts.

If we had gone with option 1 I believe we may have been cleared but it would have been framed that we got away on a technicality, the reality now is that there has been a full investigation and all that can be levelled at us is that we wouldn't help Uefa to shaft us.
 
lust overlord said:
The two sides agree to pick the chairman.
City as the defendant selected him and Uefa agreed with the selection

If they didn't agree,cas would have chosen the chairman.
Click to expand...

This seems correct:
Section R54 looks to be the relevant part;
If three arbitrators are to be appointed, the President of the Division shall appoint the President of the Panel following nomination of the arbitrator by the Respondent and after having consulted the arbitrators. The arbitrators nominated by the parties shall only be deemed appointed after confirmation by the President of the Division.

It makes it more odd that the hacks are claiming that it is against the rules for City to nominate the President (Chairman)
 
MillionMilesAway said:
This seems correct:
Section R54 looks to be the relevant part;
If three arbitrators are to be appointed, the President of the Division shall appoint the President of the Panel following nomination of the arbitrator by the Respondent and after having consulted the arbitrators. The arbitrators nominated by the parties shall only be deemed appointed after confirmation by the President of the Division.

It makes it more odd that the hacks are claiming that it is against the rules for City to nominate the President (Chairman)
Click to expand...


The rules are in black and white.

Its not odd when the hacks are desperately twisting to keep their credibility.
Ha.
 
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