We actually did,how have you come to the conclusion we didn't ?There was a program the other day where a an actual court case was actually re run with word for word from the transcript re run in front of two juries.
The two juries can to different conclusions.
My point is that even if the evidence is exactly the same different panels won’t necessarily reach the same decision then you have to factor in the different jurisdictions namely the PL rulebook and UEFas then CAS operates under Swiss Law and the PL under English Law
One final point is that surely it wasn’t that City proved to a comfortable satisfaction it was surely the fact that UEFa didn’t
Have done it's still a B rumour , with loads getting their knickers in a twist over it, whers is your proof?go back on the thread and read, please do keep up ;-)
It's been confirmed by trusted people who do have contacts, if you want an actual video recording then dream on.Have done it's still a B rumour , with loads getting their knickers in a twist over it, whers is your proof?
Unless there are any confirmed and authenticated developments from Lord Pannick's chambers, perhaps more speculation/ guess work from esteemed posters is best avoided.What proof do you have we were offered a deal, nobody knows. It's like make believe suddenly becoming reality.
And the press haven:t got hold of it?It's been confirmed by trusted people who do have contacts, if you want an actual video recording then dream on.
it was on the front page of the Mirror, did you not see itAnd the press haven:t got hold of it?
no... they could if the panel or jury comprised lay people, but judges, tribunal chairman and there professionals are considered to be above all the hysterical white noiseCan City use the press and media pile on and indirectly putting pressure on the panel to influence them as evidence City are treated differently to offer clubs ?
As I've said in the post you've quoted. We're not admitting to any wrongdoing.Maybe the settlement is about 'not cooporating' with investigation.
We actually did,how have you come to the conclusion we didn't ?
This is what we have had to endure throughout this period, people like you ,who cannot or will not, read the judgment as written by the commission and then put their own interpretation on it.
Read the report,13 times the words no evidence was used in relation to the uefa chargeses.
No wouldn't dream of conributing to that paper, they say we are guilty, do you believe that?it was on the front page of the Mirror, did you not see it
Complaint to Home of Roan IncomingAnd if the BBC could get any worse with its constant insinuations and lies about City they are now trying to defend the theiving Portugese piece of shit for "morally saving" football. Where were the BBC morals regarding Jimmy Savile and Huw Edwards? Oh yes, they were swept under the carpet.
Anyhow, here's the article
Man City case 'moral reward' for Football Leaks hacker, lawyer claims - https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c74852evz50o
There wont be any leaks from his chambers, of that we can be sureUnless there are any confirmed and authenticated developments from Lord Pannick's chambers, perhaps more speculation/ guess work from esteemed posters is best avoided.
More time can then be spent observing the desperate writhing of the deluded ignoramus’s amongst our socially inadequate and cerebraly challenged detractors.
'We are Innocent Day' promises to be as memorable as any victory in our modern history.....different but very memorable !!
Which works by keeping the same clubs in the top handful of the table I supposeThank you both very much.
The amounts are much bigger than I was guessing at, but not enough for the rags and others to explain why we outperform them on the pitch. that still comes down to their owners wanting to take money out rather than put it in.
For me that is what is behind the rules and the charges. it's not racism per se, it's a battle over different business models. The American owned clubs want a cosy arrangement where owning a premier League club is just a way to make a return on their investment like an NFL franchise
We really have to stop thinking that is a criminal trial with a jury. It isntThere was a program the other day where a an actual court case was actually re run with word for word from the transcript re run in front of two juries.
The two juries can to different conclusions.
My point is that even if the evidence is exactly the same different panels won’t necessarily reach the same decision then you have to factor in the different jurisdictions namely the PL rulebook and UEFas then CAS operates under Swiss Law and the PL under English Law
One final point is that surely it wasn’t that City proved to a comfortable satisfaction it was surely the fact that UEFa didn’t
I said “a deal”, not “the deal”. Widely confirmed there will have been an attempt to settle before litigation, we will have told them to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. We want complete exoneration, pure and simple.What proof do you have we were offered a deal, nobody knows. It's like make believe suddenly becoming reality.
They’re just reporting what Pinto’s lawyer said. It’s not a BBC opinion - it’s Pinto’s lawyer’s opinion. If you read the article it is put to him that City won at CAS and his response is one of a squirming ****.And if the BBC could get any worse with its constant insinuations and lies about City they are now trying to defend the theiving Portugese piece of shit for "morally saving" football. Where were the BBC morals regarding Jimmy Savile and Huw Edwards? Oh yes, they were swept under the carpet.
Anyhow, here's the article
Man City case 'moral reward' for Football Leaks hacker, lawyer claims - https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c74852evz50o
Yeah I seem to remember 2 people telling me on the same case that they were on that they couldn’t keep there jobs open for them as they had to recruit new people due to the length of time they had been on that particular case,I’m quite certain that’s illegal in the UK mate, so someone may have been pulling your plonker
"Confirmed and Authenticated"....There wont be any leaks from his chambers, of that we can be sure
Yet another article in bad faith from the BBC. Pinto was convicted of extorting money from Doyen Sports. The evidence was overwhelming. He is not some sort of hero. The BBC didn’t even cover his trial.Complaint to Home of Roan Incoming
"Man City case 'moral reward' for Football Leaks hacker, lawyer claims".
The above headline echoes the purpose of this article, which is clearly intended to defend a convicted extortionist whose corrupted evidence was comprehensively exposed by CAS two years ago after it was misused by UEFA to charge Manchester City with sponsorship wrongdoing under pressure from its elite rivals . Those same teams now control the Premier League, forcing it to repeat their earlier failed attempt to damage City using the identical doctored emails and once again relying on the full-throated support of your Sports Editor Dan Roan to endorse their blatantly racist, anti-arab media narratives . This outrageous piece is just the latest example of his many attempts to smear the club following his permanent banning by them in 2018 for lying about Patrick Vieira. Over the years he has abused his position by enthusiastically promoting every element of the redshirt cartel's relentless anti-City propaganda campaign as it moved from 'state ownership' to 'financial doping' to 'sportswashing' and now the 'dirty cheating oil club ' slur. When these current confected charges are again dismissed as baseless the BBC will surely have to answer for his conduct (and that of subordinates under his direction) in nearly a decade of disgracefully biased reporting about Man City by our national broadcaster and the reputational damage it has unjustly inflicted as a result.
(This complaint is copied to Lisa Nandy MP Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport
Glad you're not offended. Nobody would ever say you don't have a sense if humour.None taken. I AM an old woman. As long as you don’t say I haven’t got a sense of humour! ;-) :-)