Tbilisi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 8,365
- Team supported
- City and Darlington FC
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
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.
Should we now go after the papers?
- Thread starter King KdB of Belgium
- Start date
yeah, not sure how we would react to being leathered by the wider media - couldn't imagine what this would feel like.as if a foreign ownership is going to try and clamp down on UK media, get real, they'd be leathered by the wider media
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
Sue them for £50 million perhaps?
Oh dear, how can you 'go after' a news outlet for reporting that we'd been banned for 2 years for FFP infractions when we were actually banned for 2 years for FFP infractions.
£50 million jokes aside, he’s got a valid point. Nothing wrong in reporting the news that we were banned of course. Nothing wrong even with Tariq Panja reporting info that has been leaked to him from inside UEFA (he’s just doing his job - it’s the person who leaked it that needs to be dealt with), but it’s the narrative that so many have peddled along that we can’t possibly be innocent of these charges even before UEFA reached their verdict. That’s utterly disgraceful and needs nipping in the bud.
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
A laugh about it at licence fee payers expense you mean....I watched Sky's football show this morning (for the first time - no contest with Ken Bruce). The Liverpudlian guy Stephen, whoever he is, is presumably getting paid for his "contribution" but he was clearly ignorant of the CAS judgement. He said, more or less, that City had been found guilty of breaking the rules but the penalty had been reduced. The anchorman guy, whoever he is, then read out the exact wording of the CAS verdict and you could see an extremely dull light bulb flickering in Stephen Whoever's head that he'd just made an arse of himself. However, I can live with people who are clearly not the sharpest knives in the box, even though paying them seems questionable when they demonstrate a grasp of the subject slightly less than that possessed by the average Fresian cow. What I did find appalling was the Roan piece. I went to the BBC site just to get an impartial view and found Roan's bitter load of bollox.
I usually let journalists' pearls of wisdom wash over me but Roan this morning was an utter disgrace. City are not going to be suing any journalists. But I hope they let the BBC know that they and the club's relationship with them will be severely jeopardised if there is any more of this crap. You would have thought the BBC would have learned from Fergie's 8 year ban on talking to them, but obviously not.
Of course, people like Roan are deeply annoyed that the reams of copy they had prepared about the demise of City have been an utter waste of time. So I suppose we can have a laugh about that at their expense.
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Not heard Simon Jordan yet on Talk Shite but he regularly called City cheats
No we don't need them, they need us,just let it be known that City will refuse entry to any reporters that have made money by proposing that we are cheats or any an all racist statements by our owners but still offer the media outlets the opportunity to supply a more suitably balanced reporter to take their place
I don't care much for going after the papers, but this article must be answered for.
Every single accusation has been proven wrong.
City were right to complain about UEFA's process.
City were right to say an independent body would clear them.
City were right to question the independence of the body when UEFA sources are now admitting the prosecution was politcally motivated.
City were right that a three other European judges will see what those serving the Uefa panels were unwilling to.
The lies, and misinformation only came from David Conn, not Manchester City.
Manchester City show disrespect to Uefa with misinformation and sweeping claims
David Conn
Then there are the specific allegations, that this European body is flawed, its processes and officials improper and prejudiced, for reasons unexplained. On the specific allegation against Leterme, City’s hierarchy understand – clearly – that in framing the statement they were alleging bias, prejudice and impropriety by every member of the CFCB’s two “chambers,” who looked at City’s “irrefutable evidence” and found themselves unconvinced.
The two-stage chambers manned by semi-independent appointees is designed to avoid as far as possible an organisation being the prosecutor, judge and jury that City claim to be the case. The adjudicatory chamber, which heard the charges when they were made by Leterme’s investigatory chamber, is chaired by José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, a former general prosecutor in Portugal. After hearings last month, he reached the finding that City were guilty, as did the chamber’s other members: Christiaan Timmermans, a Dutch law professor; Louis Peila, a very experienced Swiss judge; Adam Giersz, a former Polish sports minister; and the English barrister Charles Flint QC. He is president of the UK’s National Anti-Doping Panel and trusted enough in Abu Dhabi’s neighbouring emirate of Dubai to be a director of its financial services authority.
So City’s reaction to the considered conclusion of these distinguished European professionals was to allege that all were biased, and reached a prejudged conclusion signalled by Leterme.
City will go furiously to the court of arbitration for sport, where they say three other European judges will see what those serving the Uefa panels were unwilling to: that contrary to the meaning of their own emails, Sheikh Mansour was not subsidising a significant portion of the Etihad sponsorship.
Due process means they have the right to make their case at Cas, and both City and Uefa must accept the result. In the meantime, City might consider the tone and scale of the allegations they are making, in a time of already undermined trust in Brexit Britain for great European institutions.
Every single accusation has been proven wrong.
City were right to complain about UEFA's process.
City were right to say an independent body would clear them.
City were right to question the independence of the body when UEFA sources are now admitting the prosecution was politcally motivated.
City were right that a three other European judges will see what those serving the Uefa panels were unwilling to.
The lies, and misinformation only came from David Conn, not Manchester City.
Manchester City show disrespect to Uefa with misinformation and sweeping claims
David Conn
Then there are the specific allegations, that this European body is flawed, its processes and officials improper and prejudiced, for reasons unexplained. On the specific allegation against Leterme, City’s hierarchy understand – clearly – that in framing the statement they were alleging bias, prejudice and impropriety by every member of the CFCB’s two “chambers,” who looked at City’s “irrefutable evidence” and found themselves unconvinced.
The two-stage chambers manned by semi-independent appointees is designed to avoid as far as possible an organisation being the prosecutor, judge and jury that City claim to be the case. The adjudicatory chamber, which heard the charges when they were made by Leterme’s investigatory chamber, is chaired by José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues, a former general prosecutor in Portugal. After hearings last month, he reached the finding that City were guilty, as did the chamber’s other members: Christiaan Timmermans, a Dutch law professor; Louis Peila, a very experienced Swiss judge; Adam Giersz, a former Polish sports minister; and the English barrister Charles Flint QC. He is president of the UK’s National Anti-Doping Panel and trusted enough in Abu Dhabi’s neighbouring emirate of Dubai to be a director of its financial services authority.
So City’s reaction to the considered conclusion of these distinguished European professionals was to allege that all were biased, and reached a prejudged conclusion signalled by Leterme.
City will go furiously to the court of arbitration for sport, where they say three other European judges will see what those serving the Uefa panels were unwilling to: that contrary to the meaning of their own emails, Sheikh Mansour was not subsidising a significant portion of the Etihad sponsorship.
Due process means they have the right to make their case at Cas, and both City and Uefa must accept the result. In the meantime, City might consider the tone and scale of the allegations they are making, in a time of already undermined trust in Brexit Britain for great European institutions.
avoidconfusion
Well-Known Member
David Conn should get a Stadium Ban - I detest that prick. More so than any of the others because he claims to be a City fan or at least used to!
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
We're above it. We've been exonerated, they look like the arseholes that they are. They've got egg on their face. Let's just savour it.
As a club, we walk away, we keep doing what we're here for: playing superbly stylish football.
As a club, we walk away, we keep doing what we're here for: playing superbly stylish football.
Lovebitesandeveryfing
Well-Known Member
in a time of already undermined trust in Brexit Britain for great European institutions.
What!!!! I can't believe what I've just read. This has got FUCK ALL to do with it.
And the last three words beggar belief. UEFA is a "great European institution” like the Sicilian mafia is.