Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million

BobbyManc said:
Yes, City went to CAS and said 'oh, we did do what UEFA said we did, but we wanted you to look at it because we don't trust them. Please oh please find us innocent'. And CAS did just that.

Are people this blinded by partisanship? Really?
Click to expand...

Pretty much my question, really. Why would City provide incriminating evidence to CAS when they have no need to do so? CAS take a call based on the evidence provided by UEFA, and the case they're making. That's what you've contested, that UEFA have no legal grounds to ban you based on what they have. That's what the decision has been based on.

CAS is not an investigative agency which goes about handing out warrants and subpoenas to get more evidence and interview more people. It is a 'court'. The judge does not go about investigating the man in the dock, he or she relies on the evidence provided by the prosecution, which you've fecked up successfully.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
That's what I'm saying - HOW can UEFA build a credible/strong case IF City dont' cooperate... they would need full access to City's documents/financials to do that which obviously City didn't share, so any case could only be built on whatever info they could get their hands on... and it'll be the same for any club going forward.

That's the headline and yet the statement itself says - "The CAS award emphasized that most of the alleged breaches reported by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the CFCB were either not established or time-barred" so either they're just really crap at wording these statements or that suggests that some of the breaches did happen but either happened too long ago or couldn't be proven. I guess we'll know more when the full findings are published.

Also City cooperating with CAS and cooperating with UEFA are obviously too very different things.
Click to expand...

No, it is worded fine, you're just misinterpreting it. When they say time-barred, they mean UEFA do not have the jurisdiction to investigate anyway. The legitimacy of the breaches becomes immaterial to CAS as they've already concluded UEFA cannot act on it. That's the point - UEFA could not build a credible case even if City cooperated, as they are rendered powerless by their own rules. Now, at CAS, what City have clearly done is proven that (a) UEFA are time-barred, and (b) the substance of much of their claims was incorrect. Hence the headline: 'MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS'. That is not 'time-barred', that is quite unequivocally saying UEFA's charges in that regard are untrue. But as I said, I don't expect people on a Manchester United forum to pay much attention to the facts of the case.

Yes, cooperating with UEFA and CAS is very different - one is an independent body, the other is not. The independent one ruled in favour of City, the other did not.
 
Can we send all the City fans on here away on a week's vacation or more ala the scouser exodus?
Getting a bit tired of all the posts claiming full exoneration when we don't really have all the details yet. Maybe clearer when CAS posts the full verdict later this week, but even so I wouldn't mind a timeout.
 
It's already been said by many in this thread but this is another nail in the coffin of football. Chelsea and City's (and PSGs) 'achievements' to date will forever have a larger asterisk next to their name than Liverpool's this year. Watch things get even worse now following this absolute shambles of a decision. If Leeds and Newcastle are also going through a plastic / sportswashing transition soon as well the league and football at the top level has well and truly become farcical.
 
Matriac said:
Can we send all the City fans on here away on a week's vacation or more ala the scouser exodus?
Getting a bit tired of all the posts claiming full exoneration when we don't really have all the details yet. Maybe clearer when CAS posts the full verdict later this week, but even so I wouldn't mind a timeout.
Click to expand...

Could you quote some of those posts? I think I've missed them.
 
Looking forward to this being published

FTeZNGU.png
 
TrustInOle said:
Anyone who can add 1+1 know City got away with it, not the first fine for this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Anybody who can add 1+1 knows the answer is 2 and you can't do somebody twice for the same offence if you reach binding agreement once. They will also know that you can't be a related party and an unrelated party at the same time because that would mean you are 2 different things when 2 is actually
RDCR07 said:
If UEFA got it wrong then why the fine of 10m?
Click to expand...

why not read the verdict you are posting about as it explains clearly why
 
'In their country, corruption is a form of endearment'.
 
Kaos said:
Nope. Wasn't even getting my hopes up at 5th place being enough. I saw perhaps a 10% chance of this ban being upheld, looks like I was proven right.
Click to expand...
Don't think United thought it would happen seeing we are going all out to qualify through the Top 4.
 
ivaldo said:
That 80m shoelace deal with Glazer Shoes Co. looks in jeopardy now.

Congratz to your cook by the way.
Click to expand...

Dont think we had to do anything other than watch UEFA shoot themselves in the foot.

The cook could be incompetent uefa would still be worse.
 
Gandalf Greyhame said:
Pretty much my question, really. Why would City provide incriminating evidence to CAS when they have no need to do so? CAS take a call based on the evidence provided by UEFA, and the case they're making. That's what you've contested, that UEFA have no legal grounds to ban you based on what they have. That's what the decision has been based on.

CAS is not an investigative agency which goes about handing out warrants and subpoenas to get more evidence and interview more people. It is a 'court'. The judge does not go about investigating the man in the dock, he or she relies on the evidence provided by the prosecution, which you've fecked up successfully.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously suggesting City did not have to provide any evidence at their own appeal to CAS? They just said UEFA cannot prove it because we didn't cooperate with them therefore they have no evidence? Come on :lol:

I'm guessing CAS must have pulled the conclusion that City did not disguise equity funding as sponsorships out of their arsehole then.
 
crossy1686 said:
Fecking hell, sticking the boot in. This is to be expected though, it means any Spanish or German club can't compete with English and French clubs ever.
Click to expand...
Its because people are fed up of it. City fans may think this exonerates them but their chances of being seen as a proper club is in the toilet after this.
 
No really, I kinda appreciate Liverpool in this moment.

If you want something done, do it yourself. They already did more damage to City than this ban ever would.
 
padr81 said:
Didnt you just find out today it's up to the party making the allegations to prove. I'll do your logic, united players are being paid twice, once off the book. Except Luke shaw he gets paid once but only his weight in sausages. it's easy to throw around accusations,but you have to back them up.
Click to expand...
Well you just look at Shaw and you’ll see brown sauce and crumbs all over his chin. There’s your proof.
 
jontheblue said:
Anybody who can add 1+1 knows the answer is 2 and you can't do somebody twice for the same offence if you reach binding agreement once. They will also know that you can't be a related party and an unrelated party at the same time because that would mean you are 2 different things when 2 is actually


why not read the verdict you are posting about as it explains clearly why
Click to expand...
:wenger: :wenger:
 
padr81 said:
Dont think we had to do anything other than watch UEFA shoot themselves in the foot.

The cook could be incompetent uefa would still be worse.
Click to expand...
That and hand bags with dollar signs on them.

Then why are you defending the club? It's pretty obvious City have cooked the books. There are emails that admit to it.
 
TrustInOle said:
The guy literally shown you proof city do this though! :wenger:
Click to expand...

Has he? He showed me a link to Mancini being paid by two organisations. Pretty sure he wasn't a player for one and didnt show any proof he didnt act as an advisor.
 
ivaldo said:
Then why are you defending the club? Everyone knows City have cooked the books. There are emails that admit to it.
Click to expand...
They have been training for this mental gymnastics for the last 10 years. Don't expect their thought wave to be that of a normal person.
 
Uefa again being shown how incompetent they are. City may well go on to win the CL this season and all will be forgotten.
 
padr81 said:
Has he? He showed me a link to Mancini being paid by two organisations. Pretty sure he wasn't a player for one and didnt show any proof he didnt act as an advisor.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he pretty much did. Carry on though with your mental gymnastics. It's getting me through work :drool:
 
The end of the PL as we know it. I detest the prospect of moving to a Euro Super League. This now looks the only way forward. There's now no way to compete with the money & corruption of Abu Dhabi & (soon) the Saudis. There is absolutely nothing to stop them now in their pursuit of destroying the league.

You have to be very concerned about the long term future of the PL. The big broadcasting deals will dry up quicker than a puddle in the Sahara when the likes of Utd & Liverpool leave & the league becomes a Scottish League replica. Hard to imagine people stumping up subscription fees to watch City & Newcastle wallop the likes of Burnley, Palace & Southampton week in week out.
 
ivaldo said:
That and hand bags with dollar signs on them.

Then why are you defending the club? It's pretty obvious City have cooked the books. There are emails that admit to it.
Click to expand...

Because City play pretty football now so all of the cheating, human rights abusing and generally awful conduct of their owners MUST be swept aside to ensure their fans can enjoy watching more pretty football as that's the most important thing.
 
Why would anyone want a “Euro super league” just because City got away with being dodgy? It won’t happen and nor should it.
 
City and their fans are basically the equivalent to the GOP and Trump supporters at this point...

Celebrate being acquitted not exonerated
 
RDCR07 said:
We ll see if they get past Madrid first.
Click to expand...
I don't care if they win or not but they may very well go and bid for players like sancho now. Had they been banned it would have not only meant no CL but also players would have thought twice before joining them.
 
BobbyManc said:
Are you seriously suggesting City did not have to provide any evidence at their own appeal to CAS? They just said UEFA cannot prove it because we didn't cooperate with them therefore they have no evidence? Come on :lol:

I'm guessing CAS must have pulled the conclusion that City did not disguise equity funding as sponsorships out of their arsehole then.
Click to expand...

I'm saying you only had to provide, selectively, enough evidence to show that UEFA's reasons for the ban were legally void. All records over the last 5 years of whatever duration is not time barred, for instance.
 
starman said:
City and their fans are basically the equivalent to the GOP and Trump supporters at this point...

Celebrate being acquitted not exonerated
Click to expand...
FAKE BLUES!
 
cyberman said:
Its because people are fed up of it. City fans may think this exonerates them but their chances of being seen as a proper club is in the toilet after this.
Click to expand...
You're probably right, I don't think they'll be able to recover from this in the long run. The rest of the leagues are too pissed off with them.
 
It's quite easy to envision a Super League emerging now, replacing Champions League. If they wanted relegation and promotion, it could be done on an election based system. e.g lowest ranked club in the tournament is relegated, replaced by a league winner elected by Super League members.

It's pulling up the drawbridge, and it's probably bad for football generally. But you can see why the elite clubs will want to protect their own interests, when UEFA cannot do so effectively.

BobbyManc said:
Are you seriously suggesting City did not have to provide any evidence at their own appeal to CAS? They just said UEFA cannot prove it because we didn't cooperate with them therefore they have no evidence? Come on :lol:

I'm guessing CAS must have pulled the conclusion that City did not disguise equity funding as sponsorships out of their arsehole then.
Click to expand...

That's the conclusion of the judgement, but not because they didn't do it. Because it's time-barred. We have a literal email from your CFO explaining how they are doing that.
 
ivaldo said:
That and hand bags with dollar signs on them.

Then why are you defending the club? It's pretty obvious City have cooked the books. There are emails that admit to it.
Click to expand...

Because CAS have said we're innocent of the charges they looked at. If the emails were deemed evidence enough we'd be banned. What will be interesting really is how many charges were time barred and how many were proven not guilty.

TrustInOle said:
They have been training for this mental gymnastics for the last 10 years. Don't expect their thought wave to be that of a normal person.
Click to expand...

Somebodies angry. A normal person accepts the judgement of the those in the know instead of throwing around random unfounded accusations.

Here's the headline from CAS in case you forgot: MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS BUT DID FAIL TO COOPERATE WITH THE UEFA AUTHORITIES The bold part is important
 
You must log in or register to reply here.