Football Leaks/Der Spiegel articles

[citytilllidie]

This Cartel or big 14. If UEFA is made up with representatives of the clubs, then isn't UEFA the Cartel?

 

[citytilllidie]

Overspending mate. We failed the test as we weren’t allowed to deduct the pre-2011 contracts that we thought we’d be able to as they changed the toolkit.

Right, yes of course. We overspent in order to catch up.
For some reason, I thought we were guilty of misleading / hiding the funds from them
Thanks for that SWP.

 

[canyerdogputoutafire]

Maybe Liverpool leaked it to the NYT to push UEFA into it - be in no doubt John W Henry is an utter ****.

That there scouse journo Tony Evans was on talksport earlier today eulogising about his beloved, he let slip that City would getting charged by uefa later this month. Wishful thinking maybe.

 

[laserblue]

For every season we are competitive and more so winning trophies they'll be a new smear campaign. We just have to get used to it as this is how our rivals operate.

There already is. Plenty of rags, dippers, gooners and neutrals believe the FFP investigations relate to allegations of City continuing to break the rules, not that they relate to pre-2014. They just won't have it that UEFA have no issue with City's accounts since 2014. Of course the anti-City media have done nothing to disabuse them of all this. That's why these muppets are banging on about putting asterisks against our domestic treble.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

#

I think you need to go back and reread his post, I don't think he's saying that at all. He's saying that's how the press would portray it. He should have made it clearer though, that kind of subtlety doesn't come across easily by text.

Some might say that’s why that kind of subtlety is left in all of his posts no matter how many times people pull him up.
Just because it’s the norm in the media. Do you want it to be acceptable here too?
My own opinion is what he said is perfectly reasonable at one level but purposely left ambiguous.

You get a bit sick of playing games.
Particularly with posters who openly claim to be from European royalty.
Which one doesn’t really matter.

 

[WestGorton]

It's got boring to be honest. 7 years of unproven innuendo. I am so glad I support City. My Grandad stood on Hyde Road and at least our owners have never fleeced the working class via the pools.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

I saw an interview once where David Gill was being asked about the acquisition of City by Sheikh Mansour.
He was commenting that it couldn't be right for a football club to be owned and funded by 'state' wealth.
Although that was a long time ago, that title 'state owned' has stuck.
It was also during that interview, where he was saying that they should bring in financial rules to prevent a 'Leeds United' from happening again.
Once he'd said that, as we know he isn't interested in Leeds' welfare, we knew that they had City in their crosshairs and were worried to death.

He's ok if it is Bolton though

 

[avoidconfusion]

This Cartel or big 14. If UEFA is made up with representatives of the clubs, then isn't UEFA the Cartel?

Somewhere at the UEFA HQ right now

 

[nmc]

Somewhere at the UEFA HQ right now

I can certainly see that lot wearing SS uniforms.

 

[SilverFox2]

Maybe Liverpool leaked it to the NYT to push UEFA into it - be in no doubt John W Henry is an utter ****.

I agree re Mr Henry but it would be unwise if they underestimated the contacts and methods of our ownership team.
People in high places either inherit their wealth or rise to that position by using every trick in the book to achieve personal financial success.
Our owner no doubt employs the correct people to carry out all tasks that require his investments to be shall we say protected.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

That there scouse journo Tony Evans was on talksport earlier today eulogising about his beloved, he let slip that City would getting charged by uefa later this month. Wishful thinking maybe.

As UEFA leaks like a sieve, it wouldn’t exactly be a surprise if a dipper stooge had provided Evans with information. As I said above, I have no doubt we will be charged and punished at some point, irrespective of whether we’ve done anything they actually have evidence of or not. I would be equally surprised if any ban is only for one year. These twats want what they’ve always wanted, the complete ruination of our club, which would mean a long enough ban to force Pep, Kev, Bernie etc etc, to consider their futures with us. Also, a 3 year ban for example, would reinforce the notion of the depth of our “cheating” and would ensure the media trashes our reputation to the point of no return.
It would then be up to City to try and get CAS to overturn this travesty, which, given the media shit storm that would have preceded it, would of course be seen by everyone else as us “getting away with it on a technicality”, ie we’re still “cheats”. Never forget we cost the old guard a fortune in terms of both trophy winning prestige and cold hard cash, and this is the only chance these bitter, spiteful, bent bastards have left to nobble us.
Personally, I’d rather City played this out in the Courts rather than CAS, and went after UEFA for hundreds of millions in damages, but I don’t know what grounds we would have for this, ie would the decision making process of the governing body of a sport be something we could go after judicially, or would we have to target FFP itself? Maybe a Blue Moon legal eagle could enlighten me.....

 

[SWP's back]

Skip, what I meant by giving them back to us is that, we then can prove once and for all to the paper that they are ours or not. So therefore if the e-mails are not ours, they will not only have to print a very sincere apology, but will also have to go to UEFA and say that there is nothing at all in the story. This because the e-mails we have received have been proved to be phony.

I have watched enough crime shows to now know that they can find out if those hacked e-mails are ours or not.

We’ve not once suggested they are not our emails or questioned their veracity. Simply the context.

 

[Sir peace frog]

Skip, what I meant by giving them back to us is that, we then can prove once and for all to the paper that they are ours or not. So therefore if the e-mails are not ours, they will not only have to print a very sincere apology, but will also have to go to UEFA and say that there is nothing at all in the story. This because the e-mails we have received have been proved to be phony.

I have watched enough crime shows to now know that they can find out if those hacked e-mails are ours or not.

and ive watched enough scooby doo to tell you it was the janitor haha

 

[MillionMilesAway]

We’ve not once suggested they are not our emails or questioned their veracity. Simply the context.

I seems pretty obvious that they are, and as you say, context is everything. Having the next one say "no, we will not do that", for example.

 

[Len Rum]

As UEFA leaks like a sieve, it wouldn’t exactly be a surprise if a dipper stooge had provided Evans with information. As I said above, I have no doubt we will be charged and punished at some point, irrespective of whether we’ve done anything they actually have evidence of or not. I would be equally surprised if any ban is only for one year. These twats want what they’ve always wanted, the complete ruination of our club, which would mean a long enough ban to force Pep, Kev, Bernie etc etc, to consider their futures with us. Also, a 3 year ban for example, would reinforce the notion of the depth of our “cheating” and would ensure the media trashes our reputation to the point of no return.
It would then be up to City to try and get CAS to overturn this travesty, which, given the media shit storm that would have preceded it, would of course be seen by everyone else as us “getting away with it on a technicality”, ie we’re still “cheats”. Never forget we cost the old guard a fortune in terms of both trophy winning prestige and cold hard cash, and this is the only chance these bitter, spiteful, bent bastards have left to nobble us.
Personally, I’d rather City played this out in the Courts rather than CAS, and went after UEFA for hundreds of millions in damages, but I don’t know what grounds we would have for this, ie would the decision making process of the governing body of a sport be something we could go after judicially, or would we have to target FFP itself? Maybe a Blue Moon legal eagle could enlighten me.....

Mate I can smell your pessimism from here.
It would be very difficult for UEFA to justify a three year ban if they don't ( in one of your scenarios) have any evidence of wrongdoing on our part.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Mate I can smell your pessimism from here.
It would be very difficult for UEFA to justify a three year ban if they don't ( in one of your scenarios) have any evidence of wrongdoing on our part.

Do you really think that the ability to “justify” something will play any part in UEFA’s thought processes? How do you think we got to where we are now? We submitted a 100 page document to them at stage 1, and their response was to leak advanced news of their intention to charge us (in order to comply with a 5 year deadline), without attempting to address the points therein. I expect nothing from stage 2 of their process.
We won’t get a fair hearing of any description until we get to the CAS stage IMO

 

[SilverFox2]

Do you really think that the ability to “justify” something will play any part in UEFA’s thought processes? How do you think we got to where we are now? We submitted a 100 page document to them at stage 1, and their response was to leak advanced news of their intention to charge us (in order to comply with a 5 year deadline), without attempting to address the points therein. I expect nothing from stage 2 of their process.
We won’t get a fair hearing of any description until we get to the CAS stage IMO

I realise it may not get to that this stage but I get the feeling our owners are giving the "process" every chance to consider our evidence so that any legal stuff is in place.
Disregarding that and still finding us guilty may be what the cartel want but legally gives us ammunition should it get to that stage.

 

[Ric]

Mate I can smell your pessimism from here.
It would be very difficult for UEFA to justify a three year ban if they don't ( in one of your scenarios) have any evidence of wrongdoing on our part.

It would be very difficult for UEFA to justify a three year ban even if they had concrete evidence of any wrongdoing!

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

I realise it may not get to that this stage but I get the feeling our owners are giving the "process" every chance to consider our evidence so that any legal stuff is in place.
Disregarding that and still finding us guilty may be what the cartel want but legally gives us ammunition should it get to that stage.

I don’t disagree. There’s been plenty of abuse of the process already by UEFA. As long as CAS plays fair, that should be the stage that represents our best chance of winning

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

It would be very difficult for UEFA to justify a three year ban even if they had concrete evidence of any wrongdoing!

They’re stuck between a rock and a hard place, so personally I don’t think proportionality will be uppermost in their minds. Keeping the cartel happy whilst passing the hand grenade to someone else will be all they’re after. I keep coming back to what this is all about, namely money, and specifically a load of greedy Americans who thought they were going to make a killing, but are being (broadly speaking) prevented from doing that by City. Beyond tarnishing our reputation further, I don’t see that a one year ban would achieve what they want. Lots of variables of course. What would the potential blowback be in pushing our owners too far, how much resistance might UEFA show in the face of the cartel’s demands, etc.