simon23
Well-Known Member
So am i correct in thinking that
A) UEFA based part of their accusations on hacked emails - those emails have been proven to be not only illegally obtained but then tampered with/edited to make it seem that we were doing wrong. ie - someone deliberately tried to set us up by providing and or using evidence that was false.
B) The time bared thing - they tried to do us for deals/money that were outside the timeframe (before) FFP was brought in? UEFA basically tried to do us for doing something before the rules even existed?
C) UEFA's claims that we didn't cooperate multiple times was actually shown to be non cooperation just twice - refusing to answer questions based on evidence we knew to be at least incorrect and at worst a "fit up."
Is that about the short of it?
A) UEFA based part of their accusations on hacked emails - those emails have been proven to be not only illegally obtained but then tampered with/edited to make it seem that we were doing wrong. ie - someone deliberately tried to set us up by providing and or using evidence that was false.
B) The time bared thing - they tried to do us for deals/money that were outside the timeframe (before) FFP was brought in? UEFA basically tried to do us for doing something before the rules even existed?
C) UEFA's claims that we didn't cooperate multiple times was actually shown to be non cooperation just twice - refusing to answer questions based on evidence we knew to be at least incorrect and at worst a "fit up."
Is that about the short of it?