My error. I have re-read and understood the context in which 'sub-human' was deployed.I’m not a fan of Liew and his turgid writing style, but based on the construction of that sentence I’m not sure I agree with your analysis of those words.
I'd not really looked at the argument before, but Parisian put it brilliantly last night.
Does UEFA seriously consider City would only be able to charge £8m per annum for the sponsoring of our shirt, stadium and training campus?
And the next time someone you hear or know states we have been inflating our sponsorship, kindly tell them to fuck off in the general above pertinent point.
UEFA was already on record as stating the Etihad deal was fair value (ten years ago) nor a related party.
So which is it, we are inflating sponsorship that is deemed fair value, or the Etihad cash is being topped up by a non-related party!
You really shouldn't.
CAS need to throw this out stating the process was flawed while on the QT City agree not pursue it further.
You really shouldn't.
CAS need to throw this out stating the process was flawed while on the QT City agree not pursue it further.
the indupitability of your perlocution is invincible.
Can you clarify where this information comes from?
My guess would more likely be, if requested CAS will suspend a ban providing that the appeal is not seen as trying to get around the ban and that it would adversely affect the competition if it wasn't suspended , ie it has merit. I don't believe that CAS will look at likely success so if they do suspend the ban then we shouldn't assume that its a sign of likely success
UEFA are really questioning where a sponsor is getting their funds from to pay for sponsorship of a football club. Only, it isn't really any of their business and if they think it is, why are all other sponsors within the game not subjected to the same scrutiny?
Wenger's more dangerous than the GPC ever was. What UEFA have done is bring together lots of football people with a like-minded distrust of City where they obsess about us every day and the combined feelings have boiled over to pure hatred. It's comical, really, that an organisation designed to promote and safeguard a sport and its members has let itself get so sidetracked with its determination to do exactly the opposite of its purpose. The idea of FFP to deny rich clubs a monopoly at the expense of other teams is sound in theory, but UEFA have proved they have no idea how to implement such a mechanism.
Let these haters continue to spout their nonsense, it's all evidence pointing to collusion by other clubs.
Possibly our targets may be persons rather than Organisations or even Clubs?maybe so..but we need to make sure that this doesn't happen again further down the line. Hence the stance we have taken - we took the pinch last time under their corrupt governing rule. Our owners who do world wide business and are reported to conduct that business with both honour and confidentiality and have just been thrown to the dogs by UEFA
That shouldn't and hasn't gone down well at all.
Boo-hoo, ickle old city and their owner pinched my players and stopped me competing...so you old fossil it had nothing to do with you not wanting to spend any money or your own clubs owners not wanting to make the next step
Get to fuck you old dinosaur
Speak for yourself. My opinion is that the Club were caught when goal posts were moved by UEFA, took their ‘Pinch’ and were subsequently released by UEFA from all of the restrictions applied and a large proportion of the fine refunded. The release was done on a binding legal basis. What evidence do you have that the club has been ‘teetering on the edge’?but I think people are more or less of the same opinion here that City have been teetering on the edge of FFP for some time and may or may not have slipped up
When the club tried to stop the investigation in November and was told by the CAS that UEFA could continue and could use the material that was gained unlawfully, the writing was on the wall. UEFA was always going to reach this decision.
I'm sure it will come out in time but we don't know what other information UEFA have regarding this but I think people are more or less of the same opinion here that City have been teetering on the edge of FFP for some time and may or may not have slipped up. Unless UEFA can prove that SM moved money himself or directly instructed someone in the government to do so to fund his own projects (conflict of interest) UEFA haven't got a leg to stand on.
What do City have to gain from that. The damage to our reputation has been done.
I don't want us getting off on a technicality.
City should go for the jugular and ruin the fuckers.
This is an interesting comment from the head of commercial activities of OctagonUK, one of the partner of UEFA and trusted audit firm used for fair value market assessment.
He wonders why Puma made this statement. If they weren't sure, it would have been best for them not to comment. So City must have given them solid proof of being cleared in an appeal.
This is 2014 Octagon valuation of City sponsorship :
Worth noting that the minimum value given to Etihad deal is 40 and maximum is 50. Even though it is lower than the actual deal, it is nowhere near close to the 8 M figure. This alone should tell the attacks on City aren't legit.
Dont give him/her any respect as they are not due any.
All day yesterday they have been spouting utter shite on this subject and they continue to do so, despite being put right and pointed in the direction of facts that prove his opinions are not worth jack shit.
Still, us getting banned has woken him up on here so not all is lost.
Hopefully when its thrown out they will go back to sleep again until the next thing that pricks their attention.
Exactly. Was it ever clarified what they did with the first lot of money they robbed from us? Thieving twatsHe and his poxy club gladly took City's 'financially doped' money though. The wizened senile old hypocrite.