CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

[NorCalBlue]

Don't put astericks on a tweet pal, Liverpool fans will get giddy thinking it's about their PL title.

;-)

 

[Kirkiep]

;-)

Galling

 

[fulabeer]

I don't often do this but that BBC article has annoyed me enough to make a complaint. It's completely unacceptable that some bitter rag/dipper on their sportsdesk can get away with such a transparently biased article on a supposedly impartial public broadcast service and it's the main article no less.

If you also want to let them what you think
https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint

Copy and paste this link into the text box for reference
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53571659

Just did a long winded complaint. I can understand the gutter press leading with this shit. But i'm not accepting it from the BBC. Has anybody forwarded this to City yet?

 

[Don Karleone]

Is it me or have the beeb slightly changed the headline stating City didn't break FFP ! at the end of it ?

It's what they and the rest of the media do. Clickbait headline first, truth later when they know most people have already seen the first one.

 

[bluwes]

Keegan and his family are all rags

Keegan is a Yonner

 

[slbsn]

 

[mccity]

The Guardian are going with time-barred.

 

[BlueAnorak]

I'm voluntarily off Twitter in protest against their failure to deal with antisemitism but there's going to be some fucking bloodletting at 9:01am tomorrow.

I'm getting ready for this...

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Yeah, it's a shocker.

The Conn piece? Very odd to focus on the CFCB report so much. Shame CAS said no.

The "CFCB proved ADUG funding of other sponsorships in 2012" is amazingly bent in it's perspective - no mention that it's based on an email or two, and similar claims were binned as unsupported.

 

[BlueRockape]

To be clear, we are reprimanded for ‘lack of cooperation’ for 2 key identified issues.

1. UEFA demanded the right to cross examine a load of MCFC staff in their own hearing in 2019. Only Sorriano attended. The CAS states that MCFC provided these witnesses for CAS and their evidence was compelling. MCFC have put forward no reason as to why we presented these witnesses to CAS but not UEFA (guess we can’t say - ‘they are bent ****s’?)


2. Evidence never produced by City to the AC/IC - this was demands for full email transcripts AND OUR PERMISSION FOR UEFA TO LIAISE WITH ETIHAD TO DEMAND EMAILS/BANK TRANSFERS IN RELATION TO MCFC. UEFA have no legitimacy to request this, MCFC refused. MCFC later provided full transcripts of the 7 emails (yes, this case is based on 7 emails) for CAS, minus 1 redaction and 1 attachment. The emails were successfully argued out of context, and deliberately manipulated.

So on the 2 points we blocked the investigation, we later provided the full evidence to CAS. CAS reprimand us for this because it makes a farce of the appeal system to not provide evidence until the CAS hearing, especially as in both cases City offered no explanation as to why we didn’t give the evidence to UEFA but did to CAS. Note, UEFA refused to pursue City for the full emails as both parties wanted a resolution by July, therefore CAS find UEFA were satisfied with all evidence and City can’t be penalised for refusing to submit further docs later in the trial.

So when any journo says ‘CITY BLOCKED THE INVESTIGATION’ - we provided all of the evidence, in the end, and the strength of that evidence is absolute and undeniable on all points.

(A note, our Legal Rep lays an absolute zinger when he says ‘according to their statement, UEFA’s evidence is incontrovertible, therefore they shouldn’t be requesting further docs here at CAS’)

I wonder if any of our legal team will make a comment ?