I don't think human rights were ever an issue with the proposed Newcastle takeover.(with regards to the nufc takeover) Does Qatar have a clean human rights record? I mean they're embedded in football quite a lot, seat on the uefa council, buy and sell the PL product around the world . Is this a double standard thing?
Bingo.They have to keep the pretence going that we are sustaining our spending contrary to the rules because if we are doing it within the rules, then the natural assumption would be, why can't the other 'big' clubs, with all their history and big fan bases, match or even do better than us? The answer isn't very palatable for them, but is in plain sight - those clubs are run by poor business people whose only object is to take money out.
Some of the redactions involved amounts and some names, so I assume mainly it was to protect commercially sensitive information and inviduals who didn't need to be named, as they weren't directly part of this.@Prestwich_Blue Do we have any idea what was redacted and what attachment was with held in the emails we provided for CAS and why that was allowed ? Could have said virtually anything in that section of the email. I thought things would only be redacted if they where commercially sensitive and even then CAS would see them just would not be in the report but that is not how I read it I read it as no one saw the redacted and missing attachment. Is that correct ?
Which is of course, a very good reason to introduce some kind of financial regulation to prevent this kind of thing.They have to keep the pretence going that we are sustaining our spending contrary to the rules because if we are doing it within the rules, then the natural assumption would be, why can't the other 'big' clubs, with all their history and big fan bases, match or even do better than us? The answer isn't very palatable for them, but is in plain sight - those clubs are run by poor business people whose only object is to take money out.
There is a very simple solution for UEFA to implement, but because of those clubs of the G14, they will never implement it. The proposal that I would like to see UEFA implement, is that any clubs with a deficit of more than £100 million, or equivalent in Euros. Will not be able to partake in either the Champions League or the Europa League, until that deficit is brought below that level.In
Once any club brings it below that level they will be able to partake from the following season. As long as the club keeps it below that level so much the better for the club. Will UEFA do this not a chance, after all you can't have the Champions League being played without the likes of Barcelona, Real Madrid, Manchester United etc..
Some of the redactions involved amounts and some names, so I assume mainly it was to protect commercially sensitive information and inviduals who didn't need to be named, as they weren't directly part of this.
As far as I read the judgement, everything we didn't supply was agreed by UEFA. There was a run of emails they'd asked for, connected to one of the emails Der Spiegel published. We refused to supply that initially to UEFA & CAS criticised them for not insisting we did that before rushing through the charge and sanctions. When it came to CAS, they asked for them again and we said it would take too long to retrieve them. It looks to have been a fishing expedition by the CFCB in my view and again, in their haster to get this done, they agreed that these weren't really necessary after all.The redactions in the report yes I agree but I thought I read in the report that we provided the emails requested but not an attachment and one of the emails was redacted or am I mistaken I would have thought that CAS would not have allowed us to do that
Quite possibly we saw them coming in this respect and set up the the inevitable gambit that they had no choice but to take. Bit like watching David turn a rookie CM to leave himself with n acres of space.As far as I read the judgement, everything we didn't supply was agreed by UEFA. There was a run of emails they'd asked for, connected to one of the emails Der Spiegel published. We refused to supply that initially to UEFA & CAS criticised them for not insisting we did that before rushing through the charge and sanctions. When it came to CAS, they asked for them again and we said it would take too long to retrieve them. It looks to have been a fishing expedition by the CFCB in my view and again, in their haster to get this done, they agreed that these weren't really necessary after all.