''Three pronged'? 'Fork tongued' more like..
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)
- Thread starter jimharri
- Start date
asahartford1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 9,660
3 pronged?
There are 3 separate strands to the investigation.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Admittedly I'm no expert but I'd say you're entirely wrong on every single count there.
I assumed that there are some on the list who were marked as unavailable to start with - by geography, activity, known links.
I'd then assume that there is a known sublist of those specialising in different aspects of things - not a lot of point in selecting an Australian to look into UEFA matters if there are 30 people versed in UEFA.
Similarly there would be a sublist with a background in the right subject area - sponsorships are different from contractual matters.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Can't remember a single leak of any real significance out of UEFA since Parry left. Do you think it's a coincidence that Peter Moore has now left the LFC board? I wonder what prompted that move just after winning the title.
Possibly, but if it had already gone to the AC when he left, or the AC had announced their judgement when Parry left, there wouldn't be anything to leak.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
3 pronged?
The original announcement said there were three strands, one of which was the Danish academy matter, and whether it was akin to 3rd party ownership.
There was an investigation about correct accounting - that presumably now goes nowhere.
There was also a strand about breaching the wage rise thing between 2013-6. It would be amazingly dumb to breach that one, and it's been reported that there's no timebarring in the PL.
HalfwayUpTheKippax
Well-Known Member
That's not blushing, it's alcoholic telangectasia*blushes*
asahartford1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 9,660
The original announcement said there were three strands, one of which was the Danish academy matter, and whether it was akin to 3rd party ownership.
There was an investigation about correct accounting - that presumably now goes nowhere.
There was also a strand about breaching the wage rise thing between 2013-6. It would be amazingly dumb to breach that one, and it's been reported that there's no timebarring in the PL.
The last one was terminated as another club were about to breach it.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
The last one was terminated as another club were about to breach it.
It's certainly not in force now, I agree.
It'll be very City to be found in breach of something that's been abandoned.
asahartford1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 9,660
It's certainly not in force now, I agree.
It'll be very City to be found in breach of something that's been abandoned.
It would be a travesty, but they could argue that they were the rules at the time, and as we are not liverpool, are not time barred in any way. This judicial panel will need an airing some time soon.
Colin Bells Boots
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 19,232
- Team supported
- Manchester City
The last one was terminated as another club were about to breach it.
Would that club be the rags by any chance ?
Bodicoteblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 6,052
Yes.. but what about the sanity clause?!?Rather, Chris, I think it was because we employed to lead our defence team the giant legal-eagle brain that is J.Cheever Loophole.. and I don't doubt for one second that Groucho Marx would've wiped the floor with UEFA's legal team and its paper thin case!
asahartford1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2016
- Messages
- 9,660
Would that club be the rags by any chance ?
I don't think it has been revealed, but one club were about to become the worlds highest wage paying football club.
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,849
I don't think it has been revealed, but one club were about to become the worlds highest wage paying football club.
it makes sense now.
That’s why Burnley were part of the hateful eight.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
I was wondering if Moore had been the conduit of information. It seems odd to me that he has left at this stage. The leaks from UEFA helped our case in the end and undermined UEFA. FSG couldn't have been happy about that.Possibly, but if it had already gone to the AC when he left, or the AC had announced their judgement when Parry left, there wouldn't be anything to leak.
CharliesRightPeg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Aug 2015
- Messages
- 590
From memory
Arsenal first off fell foul of the wages allowed increases within short term wage controls , hence needing to sell Sanchez or Ozil
Utd were up next and at that point it was removed
City would have had a significant advantage had it stayed
Arsenal first off fell foul of the wages allowed increases within short term wage controls , hence needing to sell Sanchez or Ozil
Utd were up next and at that point it was removed
City would have had a significant advantage had it stayed
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
Can't remember a single leak of any real significance out of UEFA since Parry left. Do you think it's a coincidence that Peter Moore has now left the LFC board? I wonder what prompted that move just after winning the title.
They know we know.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
I agree and I wonder if we are pursuing the issue. UEFA may find it hard to kick this into the long grass. Perhaps Moore's removal is damage limitation by FSG. It would be very damaging to their reputation if they were linked to leaks from UEFA following on from their hacking of our systems.They know we know.
From memory
Arsenal first off fell foul of the wages allowed increases within short term wage controls , hence needing to sell Sanchez or Ozil
Utd were up next and at that point it was removed
City would have had a significant advantage had it stayed
I still think its extremely dodgy as to why it was removed at a time Utd were desperate for it to be so, with huge contract renewals due and a huge transfer outlay. There was just no reason why something like that should quietly and suddenly be removed. of course no media picked up on it
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
I was wondering if Moore had been the conduit of information. It seems odd to me that he has left at this stage. The leaks from UEFA helped our case in the end and undermined UEFA. FSG couldn't have been happy about that.
That was certainly odd timing - CL final, CL win, PL win, gone.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
I agree and I wonder if we are pursuing the issue. UEFA may find it hard to kick this into the long grass. Perhaps Moore's removal is damage limitation by FSG. It would be very damaging to their reputation if they were linked to leaks from UEFA following on from their hacking of our systems.
I know Parry is on borrowed time for when he is exposed.
Suspect you are correct with regards Liverpool trying to put distance between themselves when UEFA's investigation into the IC leaks is concluded.
The chamber has been compromised and it won't be allowed to go unpunished.