abu13
Well-Known Member
Some proper bed wetting cunts over on the caf
CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)
- Thread starter jimharri
- Start date
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
That's what many of us thought about the UEFA FFP case. It seemed incredible that the whole inquiry was launched on the back of a handful of misleading stolen emails. But in fact when the details were eventually published by CAS it was clear that UEFA had no credible evidence. They didn't even have the emails. They had based everything on a press report in a subsequently discredited German magazine. As Martin Samuel said: "You couldn't make it up."
What was published today in the Mail was just a re-hash of a small part the UEFA case. Never underestimate how stupid some of these organisations are. My gut feeling is that the reason the PL didn't want their discussions with City published is that they are looking for a way out that saves their face. They have got much bigger fish to fry in the sport of football.
dronefromsector7G
Well-Known Member
Check this out from an ‘Everton fan’ on Grand old Team’s City thread (the poster is believed to be a dipper by many of their posters surprisingly) :
“This is the news story now of complicit cheating of a football club by way of state intervention used to cover illegality for the pursuit of sports washing to deflect from a country with some of the worst human rights abusers in the world,where honour killing crimes is worth one month in jail, where women are treated on par with animals, where homosexuals are jailed, where a country still has a form of slavery being used.
This is the cheating Man City thread mate.”
“This is the news story now of complicit cheating of a football club by way of state intervention used to cover illegality for the pursuit of sports washing to deflect from a country with some of the worst human rights abusers in the world,where honour killing crimes is worth one month in jail, where women are treated on par with animals, where homosexuals are jailed, where a country still has a form of slavery being used.
This is the cheating Man City thread mate.”
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
The article will have been checked by lawyers. There are bits that are inaccurate but I suspect it is not libellous. The headlines are carefully phrased as well.
Quite a few Dippers fully paid up members of Amnesty International then.
I just had a look on the caf thread.
When someone mentioned that owners in other industries would never be stopped from investing in their business, one guy was trying to make the point that mansour had invested over a billion that he had no chance of ever earning back.
Nobody has pointed out to him yet that he bought City for 230m? And is now valued at a few billion.
Those bastards still say they are slaves, no one works harder or better than a scouser la
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Apparently Harris is referencing emails prior to FFP being introduced, and others that are over 6 years old, so relate to things that wouldn't be actionable anyway. But apart from that, I reckon he's got us bang to rights!
I absolutely love the fact that this bitter and obsessed prick gets so worked up about us and is usually so wrong.
I absolutely love the fact that this bitter and obsessed prick gets so worked up about us and is usually so wrong.
Last edited:
glazers invested £1billion in 7 years at united and still not won the title
and by the way its not their money as shares and sponsorship do happen at utd
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
Classic gaslighting of the City fanbase here, dressed up in a cynical and shabby cloak of fake reason, sincerity and reasonable debate. How odd that these WhatsApp wankers all chose to refer to us in eerily similar terms…
The initial headline I suspect stepped over the line.
Where's Daft Donald when you need him?
Surely he could of had a nice sit down chat with Harris and ironed a few things out
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
The last time I saw DD he would do more damage by sitting on him tbf
That'll do for starters
Legal Alien
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2021
- Messages
- 4,318
- Team supported
- Manchester City
It's all re-hashed bollocks, but i reckon they know we're just about to spend some big money on signings, so they want to get their shots in first to taint that news.
You have to remember that we killed the golden goose and ruined their dream of the ESL. I am convinced that every other club, bar chelsea, would still be in that if we hadn't pulled out, or even been involved in the beginning!
Citizen Green
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 7,393
Ultimately last nights ‘developments’ from Mr. Harris read like this to me:
- Rehashing of previous issues already within public domain re email
- Regardless of how MCFC & Etihad communicate in said email, burden of proof comes down to financial transactions between the parties, these were provided to CAS last year & cleared City of the charge of disguising equity funding. Email(s) by and large irrelevant legally.
- Regardless of the above, email used for supposed new story is before PL FFP rules were implemented, if PL choose to proceed on basis supposed wrong-doings impacted future FFP periods they are outside 6 year SoL UK law
- Only way said above SoL law is ‘nullified’ & City ‘guilty’ is if it can be proven that owner funding was indeed disguised. This can’t be done using emails alone (see point 2) so incredibly high bar for PL to prove if it even comes down to that.
Basically storm in a teacup.
- Rehashing of previous issues already within public domain re email
- Regardless of how MCFC & Etihad communicate in said email, burden of proof comes down to financial transactions between the parties, these were provided to CAS last year & cleared City of the charge of disguising equity funding. Email(s) by and large irrelevant legally.
- Regardless of the above, email used for supposed new story is before PL FFP rules were implemented, if PL choose to proceed on basis supposed wrong-doings impacted future FFP periods they are outside 6 year SoL UK law
- Only way said above SoL law is ‘nullified’ & City ‘guilty’ is if it can be proven that owner funding was indeed disguised. This can’t be done using emails alone (see point 2) so incredibly high bar for PL to prove if it even comes down to that.
Basically storm in a teacup.
Last edited:
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
LongsightM13
Well-Known Member
He is genuinely as numb as a piss stone, mate. As thick as they come