UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%

  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%

  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%
  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m off to brush up on my legal knowledge by watching legally blonde 1&2. I shall hire moonbeam as my 2nd chair and moon Chester as paralegal

She-Even-Notices-Something-One-Else-Sees.gif



​
 
The perfect fumble said:
What is really bizarre is they treat us as if we are some vast herd of brainwashed unwashed.

I can't speak for other fans, but we have playboys of the western world like wot I am, and bald frauds like Prestwich Blue, who actually knows what he's talking about and every possibly variation in between.

These scribbling bastards must hate themselves having to dish up this shit for people they loathe and don't understand. I guess in the world of journalism, football punditry is the job you get when all the good ones are taken.
Click to expand...
It's just snobbery from the posh boys like Glendinning who love to sneer at real football fans.
 
Draken said:
The really bad ex presenter of soccer am chimes in on the subject. https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...tball-supporter-jimmy-greaves-manchester-city
Click to expand...

Quote from the article:
“With all the evidence at our disposal, it is evident that City broke the rules”

that links to another article by Conn, where he states “Internal City emails published by Der Spiegel in November 2018, which prompted the CFCB investigation, did suggest that Mansour substantially paid the £67.5m sponsorship stated to be from the Abu Dhabi airline Etihad. However, as the AC’s ruling will not be published until Cas issues it’s decision, it is not known whether this formed part of the charges or guilty finding.”

so Rushden claims it is evident we broke the rules, and “all the evidence at our disposal” of that is fuck all - nice one.

the annoying thing is is that fuckwits will read the first sentence, be too lazy to read anything else and take it as fact.

in either case, a proper journalist wouldn’t use the phrase “all the evidence at our disposal” for one piece of questionable evidence, and if there were multiple pieces of evidence at your disposal max, why not write them in your fucking article?
 
seafordblue said:
Having to hire the best lawyer in the business does set off a few alarm bells for me. If we’re so sure of our defence, why do we need a clever lawyer to present it?
Click to expand...

I take it that if we win then UEFA have to pay our legal fees, if we are 100% confident and UEFA arenot then this may cast further doubt on their side.
 
petrusha said:
Since he was appointed Chief Sports News Correspondent of the Mail on Sunday, at the least, a post he held for years (don't know if he still does). I agree he comes across as an utter twat and it's fair to say I'm not a fan of his output but it's perfectly legitimate to describe him as a journalist.

* * *

As for David Pannick, he's very much a class act. At the moment, I'm training a group of Russian lawyers in my firm's dispute resolution practice to develop their skills in terms of arguing a case in spoken and written English (we have a lot of cases that go to international arbitration).

I made them watch Pannick's submission in the Gina Miller case as an example of a master at work. Probably the best in the business, according to people more familiar with the commercial bar than I.
Click to expand...
As I said, since when is Haris a journalist... ;-)
 
Whilst I think our main attack will be on the decision I hope we can go after the original ruling though perhaps we cannot re open this unless we attack FFP as a hole. It would be great to get damages and money back from the original fine plus proving that the alleged transgressions would not matter had UEFA not moved the goal post
 
Just reading Mark McLaughlin owning that dweeb Max Rushden, beautiful reading.

I wonder if he posts on here Mr McLaughlin?

Pulled Rushden's tweets apart brilliantly, how and why the fuck that shithouse has waded in with his bullshit God knows but he's just got owned by Mr Mac.

Mark McLaughlin if you're on these boards, i salute you sir.
 
manimanc said:
Just reading Mark McLaughlin owning that dweeb Max Rushden, beautiful reading.

I wonder if he posts on here Mr McLaughlin?

Pulled Rushden's tweets apart brilliantly, how and why the fuck that shithouse has waded in with his bullshit God knows but he's just got owned by Mr Mac.

Mark McLaughlin if you're on these boards, i salute you sir.
Click to expand...

Pics we need pics.
 
Marvin said:
The American libertarian academic Noam Chomsky characterises 5 filters of the modern commercial media:
  1. Ownership
  2. Advertising
  3. Media elite
  4. Flak
  5. The common enemy
Coverage of City fits this pattern - particularly the flak and common enemy. For flak see the usual suspects all lining up to pen articles criticising the gullible Manchester City fan taken in by their billionaire owner.

https://prruk.org/noam-chomsky-the-five-filters-of-the-mass-media-machine/
Click to expand...

I was going to post that you've been added at number 6 but you're a nice guy and I'm a good-hearted sort.
 
WRicko said:
Whilst I think our main attack will be on the decision I hope we can go after the original ruling though perhaps we cannot re open this unless we attack FFP as a hole. It would be great to get damages and money back from the original fine plus proving that the alleged transgressions would not matter had UEFA not moved the goal post
Click to expand...

also legal fees, damages to the clubs reputation - and therefore market value

absolutely rinse the fuckers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top