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
blueju
Well-Known Member
Everyone forgets hardings before that after bates made the call for investment. New/old?If we go by the Chelsea money, another 5 years and everyone will accept us and let us into their hearts.
blueju
Well-Known Member
Without a team performing to the levels of years gone by they will be deep in the shitWith the Goldman Sachs loan - Barca are effectively managing a debt of £1.5 billion! The interest payment alone on that is going to be circa £75 per season - then they have to pay the capital off too over 20 years on the £800m from Goldman's (another circa £40m a year) . I'm sure Barca have a wildly optimistic business case showing a whole range of new revenues streams from the new stadium etc. but often these are never realised. This venture will end in a local government bale out or bankruptcy - which as the OP has said will just mean the debtors get a few pence and Barca will carry on afresh without sanction. And where is FFP in all of this?
I would not suggest anyone takes a visit to RAWK - but for those that are willing to risk a short exposure, you will find:If that was true Marvin then how come so many have?
That's always been easy except for the fact that they won't listen regardless. If we really do have something to point the finger at them, then that's the only way to shut them up. Give them something to worry about that hopefully drags on and on for a couple of years at least.
a) absolutely there is not any chance of a redscouse fan listening - it is an absolute echo chamber and even the smallest example of a poster dissenting from the narrative of our being guilty and having 'got away with it on a technicality' is jumped on by literally dozens of the pack - no dissent is tolerated - and
b) they absolutely hate us;-) Sooooo much outpouring of how we are a nothing club and mean nothing to them etc. etc.
This statement is repeated like some mantra that they live by - so strongly do they say this is how they feel it is strange that the claim has to be made so often by so many - some form of collective reassurance I think.
They are absolutely fucking bonkers - genuinely a cult mindset - and thick as fuck
Last edited:
Worth stating that the evidence proffered by Uefa in the items that were ruled out of time seems to have been exactly the same as for the items where we were cleared. City's evidence would only differ as to the figures.Sam Lee is desperate for there to be something in next week’s CAS report. Still holding out that we might be guilty in some round about away. Doesn’t consider us ‘not guilty’ that’s for sure.
Very hard to maintain that we transgressed but got off on a time techicality.
@Prestwich_BlueI have a question. When does "new money" become "old money"?
We know that the rags were on the verge of bankruptcy twice, in 1901 & 1931, and were bailed out by 'sugar daddies', So when did Gibson's money, which paid their wages, bought players and rebuilt their stadium, become 'organically generated'? Or the loans they took out to finance Baconface's team building?
We know that Danny Fiszman put money into Arsenal in the mid 1990's. I asked Tony Adams that at the FA Cup draw when it was held at the Etihad and he said that was what he'd been told. When did that stop being 'new money'?
We know that the Moore's family financed Liverpool's success in the 1970's and beyond. When did that stop being 'new money'?
Spurs raised a load of money on the Stock Market in the 1980's. Prior to that they were crippled by what was the largest debt in football, after a rebuild of parts of WHL. That money came from investors, not from success in the CL or commercial sponsorship. When did that become 'old money'?
We all know about Chelsea and they actually give us the answer to the question I think. Taken over in 2003 by Abramovich and now they're an 'old money' club, despite the fact their owner still bankrolls them.
The answer is that 'new money' clearly became 'old money' when our takeover happened, which was 23rd September 2008.
I mean this light-heartedly - but if you ever decide to make a visit to RAWK to discuss the situation with them please let me know so I can spectate for the 3 or 4 posts that you will be allowed before being banned - there is no tolerance of inconvenient truths.
You may have previously been told - but you are something of an 'arch-enemy' over there - I don't visit more than once a month or so, but I have seen your name mentioned on numerous occasions - sorry to say, not in the politest of terms - but you will not be surprised.
You have really gotten under their skin;-)
Last edited:
Thaksinssoldier
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 10,107
Spitty in the Telegraph....
Yes, Man City have a persecution complex but Jurgen Klopp was wrong to call FFP verdict 'not good for football'
"But disagreeing with the rules is no justification for obstructing investigators examining if a club has broken them.
City’s gleeful response to a reduced punishment of £9 million based on technical deficiencies in the disciplinary process exposed the depth of their persecution complex.
Upon hearing the verdict, they reacted with the joy you expect when a club wins a trophy, Pep Guardiola posting a selfie before setting his sights on Uefa for trying to implement rules and the clubs pressuring the governing body to do so.
The most laughable image is of City being a lilywhite organisation subject to attack from a hostile cabal of eight elite clubs. For the record, one of the eight clubs is Burnley. I am not sure how City, or those pleading on City’s behalf, can make the argument they are revolutionaries fighting the system and keep a straight face. Oil-rich sovereign nations are not and never will be ‘plucky underdogs’.
Add to that the content of an email from a City lawyer joking about the death of one of Uefa’s overseers and, whatever the rights and wrongs of how those documents were obtained and leaked, you find yourself in danger of losing balance on that moral high ground.
In summary, the outrage towards City and City’s outrage is pure tribalism. It demeans everyone when the juvenile spats of social or even mainstream media are encouraged and fed by the clubs."
I have contacts in the thick of Burnley and they 100% were driving this on Liverpool’s behalf.
TheThirdDeano
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 8,768
You’ve gone up in my estimation with your recent outspokenness on Sam. He was never a good writer at all never mind one impartial to city. And his most recent admission to hanging out with people actively spreading vitriol and bile against our club is the final nail in his, already frankly well sealed, coffin.He’s a fucking wankstain.
lust overlord
Well-Known Member
I would not suggest anyone takes a visit to RAWK - but for those that are willing to risk a short exposure, you will find:
a) absolutely there is not any chance of a redscouse fan listening - it is an absolute echo chamber and even the smallest example of a poster dissenting from the narrative of our being guilty and have 'got away with it on a technicality' is jumped on by literally dozens of the pack - no dissent is tolerated - and
b) they absolutely hate us;-) Sooooo much outpouring of how we are a nothing club and mean nothing to them etc. etc.
This statement is repeated like some mantra that they live by - so strongly do they say this is now they feel it is strange that the claim has to be made so often by so many - some form of collective reassurance I think.
They are absolutely fucking bonkers - genuinely a cult mindset - and thick as fuck
Its a very weird forum.
They bang on about justice.
Its a strange attitude to take from sections of a fanbase that were accused of something by the media,and a whole host of others,that they were later cleared of.
Full of hypocrites and window lickers.
Kinkys Left Foot
Well-Known Member
Worth stating that the evidence proffered by Uefa in the items that were ruled out of time seems to have been exactly the same as for the items where we were cleared. City's evidence would only differ as to the figures.
Very hard to maintain that we transgressed but got off on a time techicality.
I pretty much agree with you on that
https://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/...city-exonerated.346575/page-419#post-12813312