comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
Find it hilarious when clubs fans whine about the obscene amounts of money being thrown around to give any club an advantage when their own clubs spend stupid millions and award multi million pound contracts on players in trying to keep pace.
All as bad as each other.
And I include my own club is that in our leagues. Football now is just entertainment and those who pay the highest tend to get the rewards. One day it might end up like Saturday afternoon wrestling that was once a high draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was always of the opinion that the severity of the initial ban was as a result of City giving UEFA the finger and not cooperating. Nothing at all to do with the actual sums involved.
The fact that the CAS decision has still insisted on singling this out for a €10M fine makes me even more convinced.
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 20 seconds ago
From the judgement
“MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS BUT DID FAIL TO COOPERATE WITH THE UEFA AUTHORITIES”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite.
Corrupt AF like I said.
Nice one, I don't support city but I'm loving the fume from your rivals.
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
Uefa takes note of the decision taken by the Court of Arbitration for Sport to reduce the sanction imposed on Manchester City FC by Uefa’s independent Club Financial Control Body for alleged breaches of the Uefa Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play regulations.
Uefa notes that the Cas panel found that there was insufficient conclusive evidence to uphold all of the CFCB’s conclusions in this specific case and that many of the alleged breaches were time-barred due to the five-year time period foreseen in the Uefa regulations.
Over the last few years, Financial Fair Play has played a significant role in protecting clubs and helping them become financially sustainable and Uefa and ECA [European Club Association] remain committed to its principles
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
“ many of the alleged breaches were time-barred due to the five-year time period foreseen in the Uefa regulations.”
Got off on a technicality basically.
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it was
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 2 minutes ago
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? I don’t think you understand, it wasn’t timebarred due to the investigation this time round, it was timebarred before the investigation even started.
They were found to be not established too though so it’s a moot point really.
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but even if it was, you can still go to Cas? absolutely no reason to refuse to cooperate and thats why even Cas punished you for it... Though not enough tbh. Whats 10m to clubs that are likely to do this kind of thing?
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
All this is getting s bit like “He was offside! No he wasn’t!”
Basically the ref has decided the issue. City scored!
City 1 - 0 UEFA
Liverpool fans get over it.
think you'll ever be respected
go spend another bill
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what? refusing to cooperate with the authorities.
you got punished for it so clearly its wrong... Even if people understand your issues with it, its still wrong. You'd have still taken it to Cas and Cas would still have found the same? (providing they didnt find any evidence had you cooperated)
Cas setting weak punishments dont do any favours down the line. Now anyone can just refuse to cooperate and get away with pocket change fines.
Why are the Pool fans so wound up? The 4-0 still hurting I guess. Despite the ruling being very clear that City did not cheat the system set up specifically to cheat them, they cannot seem to understand that. I expect City will now take a case against the cartel that set up this corrupt anti Fair Play system. That may see some of those clubs punished heavily in the law courts, cartels being in breach of competition law.
May prove the spur that drives City to win the CL trophy that the club wants and the fans don't care much about.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 2 minutes ago
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? I don’t think you understand, it wasn’t timebarred due to the investigation this time round, it was timebarred before the investigation even started.
They were found to be not established too though so it’s a moot point really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Potentially, but not yet sure. The quote from CAS is that the alleged breaches were "not established or time-barred" which implies that some breaches lacked evidence but others were time-barred. Otherwise it would say "not established and time-barred"
This also doesn't mean that City definitely got off on a technicality. You could be right that all charged were deemed insufficient as well as time-barred. Will he interesting to see the full judgement and submissions.
Personally, if the charges were definitely time-barred by UEFA's own regulations then you have to question why they brought the charges. Surely they would be aware that they were time-barred.
Taki. You don’t seem to get it.
Fans of other clubs aren’t expected to like your own. You think we like Liverpool, United, Leeds? No we don’t. We like City.
We don’t care what you think of City. You don’t care what we think of Liverpool. That’s how it’s supposed to be. That’s what support is about.
You’re wasting your time saying you don’t respect us - that’s par for the course.
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what? refusing to cooperate with the authorities.
you got punished for it so clearly its wrong... Even if people understand your issues with it, its still wrong. You'd have still taken it to Cas and Cas would still have found the same? (providing they didnt find any evidence had you cooperated)
Cas setting weak punishments dont do any favours down the line. Now anyone can just refuse to cooperate and get away with pocket change fines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not a weak punishment though, its an applicable punishment to the offence. That is what an arbitration panel is there for.
They didn’t ban us for refusing to cooperate, they banned us for them thinking we’d breached.
yeah i get that, point is refusing to cooperate seems serious to me, 10m fine for these clubs isn't a punishment that fits the crime. Any of the clubs likely to do it, City Chelsea Psg etc, 10m is nothing to them.
“ It’s not a weak punishment though, its an applicable punishment to the offence. That is what an arbitration panel is there for.“
City aren’t going to even feel anything paying a £10m fine. They’ll write it off as cost of doing business. Will it deter them from doing it again?
I think there are bigger issues though. I get that partisan feeling will kick in, but I’d be more concerned about Uefas processes in general.
Sign in if you want to comment
Yessssss
Page 4 of 5
posted on 13/7/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
Find it hilarious when clubs fans whine about the obscene amounts of money being thrown around to give any club an advantage when their own clubs spend stupid millions and award multi million pound contracts on players in trying to keep pace.
All as bad as each other.
And I include my own club is that in our leagues. Football now is just entertainment and those who pay the highest tend to get the rewards. One day it might end up like Saturday afternoon wrestling that was once a high draw.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was always of the opinion that the severity of the initial ban was as a result of City giving UEFA the finger and not cooperating. Nothing at all to do with the actual sums involved.
The fact that the CAS decision has still insisted on singling this out for a €10M fine makes me even more convinced.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 20 seconds ago
From the judgement
“MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS BUT DID FAIL TO COOPERATE WITH THE UEFA AUTHORITIES”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite.
Corrupt AF like I said.
posted on 13/7/20
time-barred
posted on 13/7/20
Nice one, I don't support city but I'm loving the fume from your rivals.
posted on 13/7/20
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
posted on 13/7/20
Uefa takes note of the decision taken by the Court of Arbitration for Sport to reduce the sanction imposed on Manchester City FC by Uefa’s independent Club Financial Control Body for alleged breaches of the Uefa Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play regulations.
Uefa notes that the Cas panel found that there was insufficient conclusive evidence to uphold all of the CFCB’s conclusions in this specific case and that many of the alleged breaches were time-barred due to the five-year time period foreseen in the Uefa regulations.
Over the last few years, Financial Fair Play has played a significant role in protecting clubs and helping them become financially sustainable and Uefa and ECA [European Club Association] remain committed to its principles
posted on 13/7/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
posted on 13/7/20
“ many of the alleged breaches were time-barred due to the five-year time period foreseen in the Uefa regulations.”
Got off on a technicality basically.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it was
posted on 13/7/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 2 minutes ago
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? I don’t think you understand, it wasn’t timebarred due to the investigation this time round, it was timebarred before the investigation even started.
They were found to be not established too though so it’s a moot point really.
posted on 13/7/20
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 1 minute ago
As the charges with respect to any dishonest concealment of equity funding were clearly more significant violations than obstructing the CFCB's investigations, it was not appropriate to impose a ban on participating in Uefa's club competitions for Manchester City's failure to co-operate with the CFCB's investigations alone."
________
doesn't one thing lead to the other? the whole reason of refusing to cooperate is because they were probably hiding that infootherwise why do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We refused to cooperate because the trial was politically motivated. We already knew the outcome even before the first sitting.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but even if it was, you can still go to Cas? absolutely no reason to refuse to cooperate and thats why even Cas punished you for it... Though not enough tbh. Whats 10m to clubs that are likely to do this kind of thing?
posted on 13/7/20
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
posted on 13/7/20
All this is getting s bit like “He was offside! No he wasn’t!”
Basically the ref has decided the issue. City scored!
City 1 - 0 UEFA
Liverpool fans get over it.
posted on 13/7/20
think you'll ever be respected
go spend another bill
posted on 13/7/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what? refusing to cooperate with the authorities.
you got punished for it so clearly its wrong... Even if people understand your issues with it, its still wrong. You'd have still taken it to Cas and Cas would still have found the same? (providing they didnt find any evidence had you cooperated)
Cas setting weak punishments dont do any favours down the line. Now anyone can just refuse to cooperate and get away with pocket change fines.
posted on 13/7/20
Why are the Pool fans so wound up? The 4-0 still hurting I guess. Despite the ruling being very clear that City did not cheat the system set up specifically to cheat them, they cannot seem to understand that. I expect City will now take a case against the cartel that set up this corrupt anti Fair Play system. That may see some of those clubs punished heavily in the law courts, cartels being in breach of competition law.
May prove the spur that drives City to win the CL trophy that the club wants and the fans don't care much about.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 2 minutes ago
id like to know all the dodgy stuff that was time-barred because city refused to cooperate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? I don’t think you understand, it wasn’t timebarred due to the investigation this time round, it was timebarred before the investigation even started.
They were found to be not established too though so it’s a moot point really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Potentially, but not yet sure. The quote from CAS is that the alleged breaches were "not established or time-barred" which implies that some breaches lacked evidence but others were time-barred. Otherwise it would say "not established and time-barred"
This also doesn't mean that City definitely got off on a technicality. You could be right that all charged were deemed insufficient as well as time-barred. Will he interesting to see the full judgement and submissions.
Personally, if the charges were definitely time-barred by UEFA's own regulations then you have to question why they brought the charges. Surely they would be aware that they were time-barred.
posted on 13/7/20
Taki. You don’t seem to get it.
Fans of other clubs aren’t expected to like your own. You think we like Liverpool, United, Leeds? No we don’t. We like City.
We don’t care what you think of City. You don’t care what we think of Liverpool. That’s how it’s supposed to be. That’s what support is about.
You’re wasting your time saying you don’t respect us - that’s par for the course.
posted on 13/7/20
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 8 seconds ago
As in it was completely uefas issue. They’ve done it before as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
im no fan of uefa, proven to be corrupt af anyway. Issue is the punishment makes a mockery of it all. its no deterrent really is it. 10m?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what though? Not supporting a process that we’ve publicly said has been flawed and leaky from the get go?
I take the point to an extent but that was never the key issue, hence why the CAS verdict is what it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Deterrent to what? refusing to cooperate with the authorities.
you got punished for it so clearly its wrong... Even if people understand your issues with it, its still wrong. You'd have still taken it to Cas and Cas would still have found the same? (providing they didnt find any evidence had you cooperated)
Cas setting weak punishments dont do any favours down the line. Now anyone can just refuse to cooperate and get away with pocket change fines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not a weak punishment though, its an applicable punishment to the offence. That is what an arbitration panel is there for.
They didn’t ban us for refusing to cooperate, they banned us for them thinking we’d breached.
posted on 13/7/20
yeah i get that, point is refusing to cooperate seems serious to me, 10m fine for these clubs isn't a punishment that fits the crime. Any of the clubs likely to do it, City Chelsea Psg etc, 10m is nothing to them.
posted on 13/7/20
“ It’s not a weak punishment though, its an applicable punishment to the offence. That is what an arbitration panel is there for.“
City aren’t going to even feel anything paying a £10m fine. They’ll write it off as cost of doing business. Will it deter them from doing it again?
posted on 13/7/20
I think there are bigger issues though. I get that partisan feeling will kick in, but I’d be more concerned about Uefas processes in general.
posted on 13/7/20
100
Page 4 of 5