blueparrot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 29,748
Had to read 3 times to be sure myself.
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
GOULDYBOBS
Well-Known Member
Now get that muppet banner up at the ground!!
Fined for not complying with:
Article 56 – Responsibilities of the licensee
The licensee must:
a) cooperate with the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body in
respect of their requests and enquiries;
b) provide the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body with all
necessary information and/or relevant documents to fully demonstrate that
the monitoring requirements are fulfilled, as well as any other document
requested and deemed to be relevant for club monitoring decision-making
(the reporting entity or combination of entities in respect of which information
is required to be provided must be the same as for club licensing);
c) promptly notify the licensor in writing about any subsequent events that
constitute a significant change to the information previously submitted to the
licensor.
Is that UEFA moaning that we didn't tell them our defence in advance of the charge?
Article 56 – Responsibilities of the licensee
The licensee must:
a) cooperate with the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body in
respect of their requests and enquiries;
b) provide the licensor and the UEFA Club Financial Control Body with all
necessary information and/or relevant documents to fully demonstrate that
the monitoring requirements are fulfilled, as well as any other document
requested and deemed to be relevant for club monitoring decision-making
(the reporting entity or combination of entities in respect of which information
is required to be provided must be the same as for club licensing);
c) promptly notify the licensor in writing about any subsequent events that
constitute a significant change to the information previously submitted to the
licensor.
Is that UEFA moaning that we didn't tell them our defence in advance of the charge?
Er, no, fuck off.To paraphrase Thatcher during the Falklands war " REJOICE"
Sour grapes from UEFA statement. "there was insufficient conclusive evidence"
And that the five year limit hindered them.
If there was a five year limit, then why pursue it anyway? Cannot have it both ways.
So all worded to make it sound like we "Got away with it"
They've to keep the cartel happy.
horlock_was_super
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 3,633
- Location
- In complete despair at 93:19
- Team supported
- Manchester City F.C.
Over the (Blue) moon. I really feared the worst, so happy that we're in the clear.
jimmygrimblesboots
Well-Known Member
hahahahahaahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
1-FFP wasn't challenged, UEFAs stand was
2-City still wants good relationship with Cerefin UEfA head
3-Hope Cerefin crushes G14 and it's stupid power for betterment.
5-Those idiots in Harris Delaney McKenna McGeehan Conn get fucked
6+Yves Letterme the goat fucker should lose his job
7-Rick Parry needs to be held accountable
2-City still wants good relationship with Cerefin UEfA head
3-Hope Cerefin crushes G14 and it's stupid power for betterment.
5-Those idiots in Harris Delaney McKenna McGeehan Conn get fucked
6+Yves Letterme the goat fucker should lose his job
7-Rick Parry needs to be held accountable
citymike1969
Well-Known Member
I hope we haven't dispensed with our legal team's services yet... and certain individuals in the media are probably moving their homes into their spouse's names as I type this!