kaz7
Well-Known Member
It's ok i've read up
Balanced reporting as always from Ian Herbert, ffs.
The UEFA lower chamber asked City questions - the result was the 100 page document. City were promised there’d be dialogue. City heard nothing. UEFA then passed it up to the upper chamber - obviously inferring a level of guilt. City now taking legal action on the basis that the lower chamber did not undertake a proper transparent investigation. I’m guessing Uefa panicked given they were out of time. Suspect we will win in court because I very much don’t uefa have followed their own procedure. Things getting tasty.
Oooh thank you very muchThe UEFA lower chamber asked City questions - the result was the 100 page document. City were promised there’d be dialogue. City heard nothing. UEFA then passed it up to the upper chamber - obviously inferring a level of guilt. City now taking legal action on the basis that the lower chamber did not undertake a proper transparent investigation. I’m guessing Uefa panicked given they were out of time. Suspect we will win in court because I very much don’t uefa have followed their own procedure. Things getting tasty.
We met with them and heard nothing back for three weeks, despite assurances.
The next day, Uefa had kicked it up to their upper chamber.
This is a very clever move by City on a number of fronts.
Balanced reporting as always from Ian Herbert, ffs.
That will be the tone most of them report it.Expect nothing less from that biased piece of sh1te that some call a newspaper.
If City were to lose this one, it just moves to the issue UEFA want to punish City over, and that'll go down the CAS route anyway.
But if City were to win...it says UEFA are a kangaroo court. It's attacking the foundation for their decision making long before we even consider the decision.
This is a real "ouch". Even more of a declaration of war than we suspected.