Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.
Funny other clubs who don’t qualify keep there players and buy more quality players.
This isn't an argument and one which fans need to stop peddling because it won't hold up in our appeal.
The issue seems to be whether UEFA have the power to charge us for a previously agreed charge, one which has been settled and agreed.
We've clearly misled UEFA over where our finances have come from, but UEFA did agree to the settlement so its whether they are able to reopen this case.
(Or at least that seems to be my understanding)
Funny you mention the Sex Pistols. There’s a video on YouTube from the late eighties I think, in which Jonny Rotten called out Jimmy Saville and the BBC for what they are. I always think of this when the media, like the BBC, sit in judgement on City.
Our owners invest in our club and the local community. United's owners suck millions out of their club. Guess which business model UEFA prefers....
Printed in the Daily Mail same paper that says we're losing our 2014 title plus the quotes are from Aug.
B.Silva signed for us from Monaco not Benfica so no harm done.
We're going to get hundreds and thousands of negative stories over the next few months.
So as the Premier ffp rules are different, providing we are within those rules, we can to an extent spend more?
We should be concerned because one of the bodies that regulates the competitions we take part in has designed rules specifically to prevent us from competing and is trying to hobble us.
However, we can afford the best legal representation available and have the funds to take the fight for true justice as far as it is possible to go. The issue is it may take years and success cannot be guaranteed but we are at least to borrow from Martin Samuel on the right side of the argument.
how have we clearly misled them? Have you read our submissions?
This is completely correct. When UEFA bungled through an investigation to meet a deadline and wilfully ignored our submissions, the dialogue with City ended. The club was aghast at the lack of due diligence shown on the part of UEFA and made a conscious and well-deliberated decision not to engage with UEFA any further. This decision would not have been taken lightly and would have been the product of lengthy discussions with our legal team. Why dignify a corrupt process by cooperating further? So City decided to play the long game and ignored UEFA, knowing we'd get an impartial hearing eventually. This much is clear from UEFA's judgement which says we were uncooperative. In the meantime, Mr Ceferin is getting twitchy. He's attending our games and working for a plea bargain. "Not this time, sunshine. The CFCB has shown itself to be judge, jury and executioner and you've just interfered with a supposedly independent investigation. Stuff's getting leaked all over the show".
In short, we were right to not cooperate with an organisation that is a mouthpiece for our enemies. Sending over sensitive documents to people who can put it into the hands of those who have hacked us already would have been illogical.