Man_City_Loyal
Well-Known Member
some great points
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
some great points
Bluechipblue
Well-Known Member
Kicking off about doctored emails won't play because we provided most of the emails and CAS found there wasn't a huge difference in content when compared with what we provided.
From what i can gather UEFA tried to use the emails to establish a pattern or template of behaviour that made us guilty. They are essentially a red herring - CAS stated that only evidence we actually did the things that UEFA alleged would be adequate to prove UEFA's case. City and UEFA agreed that the emails were sufficient to launch an investigation but CAS decided they wouldn't be appropriate as evidence. CAS even applied a lower standard of proof than City asked for. UEFA could present no evidence except an insinuation that the two payments Pearce mentioned re Etihad when shown in the accounts and demonstrated an attempt to hide owner investment. My guess is that this is the evidence that Tony Evans refers to. UEFA also tried to infer something dodgy was going on based on the order of those payments.
We pretty much lost on every arguement we presented except demonstrating that we hadn't hidden owner investment. We didn't even need to do that because UEFA didn't establish that we did.
The emails are only relevant in that they were grounds to open an investigation. The crux of the matter is that there is no evidence that a crime was even committed.
It is the equivalent of you saying you were going to kill your mate. The police arresting you for murder and you turning up at court with your mate who has not been murdered. Ah but the police say you had a knife and you could have used that to murder him. Sure but here is my mate not murdered and he's actually my alibi because on the night you said i murdered him we were at the pub together. Oh so you were with him on the night he was murdered! Guilty!! No because he's not murdered. Well can you tell us what you did with the murder weapon? Nope. See he won't help us. He guilty
For future reference i am available at short notice for CAS 3 or to workshop with Ken Loach to develop the movie
If all you say is true - why did we warrant a two year ban for Christ sake?
Because UEFA carried the dead body around like ' Weekend at Bernies' to prolong the pretence, until it got too heavy to carry.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
My take is that CAS were annoyed that we kept some info back to present at CAS. Info that if UEFA had had might have meant the trip to CAS was unnecessary. So we should have sorted it out between us and we basically got done for playing silly buggers
CAS have to reaffirm the investigatory body otherwise everything would just go straight to CAS.
I agree, I don't see any way round that City did not comply with the UEFA reg on co-operation. Wasn't there was something about why Pearce and other witnesses were not available with no explanation?
The perfect fumble
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 24,484
The issue I have more is how big a deal they are making of that tbh. That sponsorship essentially paid for Wilfried Bony, I’d argue we were punished enough already ;)
Post of the thread!
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Along with ourselves PSG and Chelsea have all won recent CAS appeals against uefa....the cartel dont like change do they
Chelsea's was FIFA, wasn't it? The transfer ban?
Champions again in 2012
Well-Known Member
I made a thread, amazingly it seems to have taken off and people like it. If you have a spare 3 mins, feel free to give it a read. Just my observations based on the facts of the 93 page report. No agenda bullshit
I don't do twitter but that is a great summary, thank you. I have read the full report but would love to have access to the pdf one of your respondents mentioned to share with a reasonably fair minded Liverpool fan ( I know those words are usually mutually exclusive;-))
RobMCFC
Well-Known Member
And the reasons we didnt cooperate ?...........first and foremost we knew we were innocent and that it was clear that someone in the IC was leaking information to the press , it wouldnt suprise me if we appealed the fine
Not arguing the rights and wrongs, just addressing the point over why we were fined.
Will be interesting to see if we appeal the fine.
lancs blue
Well-Known Member
If that was true we'd be banned for 2 years and 30m euros worse off.I think I'm the only one on here who doesn't hold CAS in particularly high regard. As far as I'm concerned they are part of the corrupt system of international sporting bodies and have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Tricky_Trev
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 18 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 32,415
A few people had requested for it to be “unrolled”, which basically puts it all together as an article, rather than lots of separate tweets. The link is here, and you can save it as a pdf with the button at the top. Cheers mate!I don't do twitter but that is a great summary, thank you. I have read the full report but would love to have access to the pdf one of your respondents mentioned to share with a reasonably fair minded Liverpool fan ( I know those words are usually mutually exclusive;-))
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1288510539400978433.html
Now that this is done, where does this leave the UEFA disciplinary and investigatory process?
David Conn is busy trying to bolster the UEFA prosecution, but its hopeless. David Conn himself had reported that the Etihad sponsorship of Manchester City was underwritten by the UAE state, something that Prestwich Blue had established. City had long suspected that the email trail released by Der Spiegel was understandable in terms of state support of Etihad Airways and their sponsorship of Manchester City, and the documents released by the Open Skies investigation confirmed this.
The UEFA case was demonstrably weak. We had puzzled for months wondering what else UEFA had, and how their case had got through two UEFA investigatory chambers generating a draconian ban. Was there as smoking gun? In the end they had nothing.
UEFA's authority is weakened. I am not sure if this is a good thing because the G14 clubs, who were probabaly responsible for the lynch mob atmosphere in the first place, are not going to go away.
The G14 clubs manipulated financial regulations to protect their power. They tried to ensnare City, and they have used every political means to blacken our name, and they have ultimately failed.
This is not all good because they are not going to go away. UEFA is now compromised before them and weak. It's not in our interests that football fall apart but I think there's a real possibility now of opportunistic breakaways which could destroy the game.
How disappointing is it that the media have entirely focused on Manchester City and allowed UEFA and the G14's activities to go un-scrutnised? What now for the journalists who devoted a good portion of their lives towards this case? Good football people, who trusted and relied on their expertise, will put some distance between them and this discredited group, and so they should.
I hope in a few days time, City will issue a statement or give a susbstantial interview setting down our version of events so that history can truly reflect what has really just gone down because to date all that is in the public domain is what has been put there by a small group who have been pursuing a vendetta at the behest of a large group of privileged football clubs and league associations.
David Conn is busy trying to bolster the UEFA prosecution, but its hopeless. David Conn himself had reported that the Etihad sponsorship of Manchester City was underwritten by the UAE state, something that Prestwich Blue had established. City had long suspected that the email trail released by Der Spiegel was understandable in terms of state support of Etihad Airways and their sponsorship of Manchester City, and the documents released by the Open Skies investigation confirmed this.
The UEFA case was demonstrably weak. We had puzzled for months wondering what else UEFA had, and how their case had got through two UEFA investigatory chambers generating a draconian ban. Was there as smoking gun? In the end they had nothing.
UEFA's authority is weakened. I am not sure if this is a good thing because the G14 clubs, who were probabaly responsible for the lynch mob atmosphere in the first place, are not going to go away.
The G14 clubs manipulated financial regulations to protect their power. They tried to ensnare City, and they have used every political means to blacken our name, and they have ultimately failed.
This is not all good because they are not going to go away. UEFA is now compromised before them and weak. It's not in our interests that football fall apart but I think there's a real possibility now of opportunistic breakaways which could destroy the game.
How disappointing is it that the media have entirely focused on Manchester City and allowed UEFA and the G14's activities to go un-scrutnised? What now for the journalists who devoted a good portion of their lives towards this case? Good football people, who trusted and relied on their expertise, will put some distance between them and this discredited group, and so they should.
I hope in a few days time, City will issue a statement or give a susbstantial interview setting down our version of events so that history can truly reflect what has really just gone down because to date all that is in the public domain is what has been put there by a small group who have been pursuing a vendetta at the behest of a large group of privileged football clubs and league associations.