mancityvstoke
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 23,266
- Location
- Vintage terraced Kippax
- Team supported
- The only football team to come from Manchester
They all say thatYou won't because I'm not a criminal.
They all say thatYou won't because I'm not a criminal.
Talk about miss the point completely.Lot of City blue tinted shades here. We're not innocent, we've known that for years. Its funny how supposed adults can be so biased just because they "bleed for their club". I agree the penalty itself is harsh and think we should fight to have it reduced but we deserve to pay some form of penalty.
I keep seeing the sentiment "other clubs do it all the time." If that makes skirting and breaking rules okay I sure as hell hope you aren't raising children or have a job that overlaps with my interests.
That it's us... of course they are twisting the knife and piling on but we fucked up and we should be held accountable.
That this is all some elaborate anti-City conspiracy is rubbish and makes me realize how much sport- as much as it can unite- does just as much to polarize.
I sincerely doubt we would provide evidence to UEFA that would kneecap us, so realistically they're either misrepresenting what they've been given, misinterpreting it or have been the beneficiaries of additional hacked material that they haven't yet revealed publicly.
Spot on, it amazes me that there's so many Blues on here who have swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker. They blame the club, Soriano, Vicky Kloss, Sterling and everybody else without actually knowing a fraction of what exactly has occurred. I just hope none of them are CAS judges or we really are screwed.Another guilty verdict, please explain to all exactly where you have this cast iron evidence of guilt?
If you are counting stolen emails, have you seen them? Can you clearly state their exact context? Can you vouch for their authentication and prove they were not tampered with? The person who stole the emails, is he currently in jail and also subject to extortion charges, so a blackmailer?
No blue tints for me, just want you and the others to clearly state these facts of guilt, and I have no idea what evidence City will submit, but I know City clearly stated they have said evidence to clear our club, so I will wait and see what evidence our club submit before I myself clearly state we have no case to answer, all you Petrocelli/Quincy/Columbo should do the same, this has only just started and the end is not as yet anywhere in sight for City or UEFA.
P.s. the above three were fine detective, medical examiner's, lawyers, haha.
To the contrary.
Their Rag/Scouse sycophants in MSM are insinuating UEFA have in their possession a comprehensive cache of emails that contain Bank accounts,sort codes,names,dates,times,invoices etc.
If this really is true, then they have withheld vital information from Manchester City FC. And have not given Manchester City FC the opportunity to view what they have in their possession and explain it.
Talk about miss the point completely.
Manchester City are as guilty as hell of the rules they have broken. But that isn’t the point. Sheikh Mansour took over the club in 2008 and these rules we have broken came into being as a reaction in 2009. They are invented rules to protect a cartel. Those rules weren’t there in the 1950’s when Liverpool were bankrolled by the Littlewoods family. Every club before and since that has enjoyed any success has had investment. These rules are designed to stop that investment and therefore protect the future success and earnings of Liverpool, United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern... et al.
So of course we’re not innocent. A quick look in our trophy cabinet tells you that. The alternative was wandering around Asia asking people politely support us on social media and buy a shirt because we’re very nice people.
Agreed.So of course we’re not innocent.
So we must be guilty because we've won stuff? That's a new take.Talk about miss the point completely.
Manchester City are as guilty as hell of the rules they have broken. But that isn’t the point. Sheikh Mansour took over the club in 2008 and these rules we have broken came into being as a reaction in 2009. They are invented rules to protect a cartel. Those rules weren’t there in the 1950’s when Liverpool were bankrolled by the Littlewoods family. Every club before and since that has enjoyed any success has had investment. These rules are designed to stop that investment and therefore protect the future success and earnings of Liverpool, United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern... et al.
So of course we’re not innocent. A quick look in our trophy cabinet tells you that. The alternative was wandering around Asia asking people politely support us on social media and buy a shirt because we’re very nice people.
To the contrary.
Their Rag/Scouse sycophants in MSM are insinuating UEFA have in their possession a comprehensive cache of emails that contain Bank accounts,sort codes,names,dates,times,invoices etc.
If this really is true, then they have withheld vital information from Manchester City FC. And have not given Manchester City FC the opportunity to view what they have in their possession and explain it.
We are innocent, as far as I'm concerned, as long as we can hide the fact we screwed FFp rules. Who gives the fuck about bent rule, it's football equivalent of abiding by apartheid rules. If there's a loophole we can use for uefa to not be able to prove anything, we're innocent. If you don't think there is a anti-city agenda with ffp just existing, then with all due respect, fuck off.
You don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.
You have been asked twice to clarify what City are guilty of but you refuse to give your view or any facts
Please enlighten us all
Yes, because UEFA are especially known for never taking inappropriate or unlawful action based on fabricated or (intentionally) misinterpreted information. And they are often held up as one of the most incorruptible organisations in the world...You don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.
Unless they obtained them quite recently which would explain why the story changed from "City not facing a ban" and "UEFA want a deal" to all-out war in the space of three weeks.
you do if when its the bent uefaYou don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.
Mate, didn't FFP come in before City was taken over with the big investments? FFP as a concept is a reasonable fair one although I do believe it should have some flexibility to capture additional investment. I do believe owners should be allowed to invest more it's their perogative really. And maybe the other PL clubs were lobbying against City that is conceivable. But once the rules have been established then its a different game.
My strategy would be too challenge the proportionality of the punishment and get it reduced but looks like the club is gearing for the fight of all fights which I feel will have far reaching repurcussions for City.
Again, unlike some here I'm not wasting my life combing through to figure out what we did and didn't do. We clearly arent innocent and if you can't admit maybe we've skirted rules to get where we are then it's pointless.You'll be waiting a while.
So having read this thread, listened to 93:20 etc etc, it seems there are a lot of layers to City's position that I have been trying to get straight in my head and wanted to put down is some kind of order. I think they are as follows but would welcome the thoughts of those better qualified than me:
1 UEFA leaked during a confidential process - however CAS have looked at this already and said they very probably did but City haven't proven they were damaged by it
2 The process was fundamentally flawed: scoping document produced after case had begun, case progressed without having read City's submission etc etc - again think we'd have to prove this damaged us?
3 We agreed a settlement covering the relevant period and you cannot now go back and reopen it - would obviously depend on the exact wording of the settlement agreement which none of us have seen
4 Your own 5 year rule means you can't reopen the case as it was opened 5 years after the settlement agreement but more than 5 after the year of the alleged offence - like Stefan on the 93:20 podcast says this seems so obvious you can't believe UEFA would have messed it up?
5 The evidence was hacked and is inadmissible - not sure this applies to UEFA processes and CAS as they are not courts?
6 The evidence is partial and here is the full email chain which shows there was no offence anyway - possible of course but we don't know what we or UEFA have here as evidence. The emails may have evidenced what was considered but not what actually happened?
7 The evidence is partial and actually the funds did not flow from our owner but from elsewhere in AD so there was no offence. This has the whole issue around what HH refers to in AD which others have already commented on.
8 The evidence is partial and the accountants of City, Etihad and indeed UEFA have signed off everything was above board so the source of funds for Etihad cannot be proven to be a problem
9 PB's point from earlier that the rules would need to be interpreted in light of current UEFA practice rather than what was in place at the time and so we would not have breached the current interpretation of FFP
10 The way other clubs have been treated for similar offences is fundamentally different
11 If this all fails, then off to a real Swiss court that FFP itself if illegal
Have I missed anything?
One aspect of this is that football is effectively beginning to eat itself. Nobody will want to put money into a club now because rules are subject to change and be retrospectively applied. Why take the risk and the threat to your personal integrity? Once SKY and BT see they are the main effective money streams where is the incentive to up the ante?
I am not saying our owners will leave but look at Nigel Wray at Saracens. Once sanctions applied he just walked away from the club. Basically in England the Premier League is confirming itself as TV's bitch and quite probably ending the gravy train.