I'm not sure what you expect, a notary certified copy of his bank account with "SECRET DOUBLE SALARY" in the payment details section. These things are always disguised as some bs consultant services.
Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
I'm not sure what you expect, a notary certified copy of his bank account with "SECRET DOUBLE SALARY" in the payment details section. These things are always disguised as some bs consultant services.
What does it say for the game, that lower league clubs are scrambling to stay alive, and this is the punishment for a club who have been caught out fiddling the fair play rules? This game is shit.
I have yet to read the full decision but I have a hard time understanding why people automatically assume that CAS was bribed or that FFP is dead. Like any conviction, UEFA had to prove their case. Like any conviction, statute of limitations apply. If UEFA didn't build a strong case, shame on them but their decisions can't be arbitrary and it's good the CAS can verifiy the grounds of such conviction, especially when consequences can be huge like that. I think UEFA has the financial means to hire good lawyers/investigators.
Looking forward to this being published
Hope you guys get in.
It's terribly worded... I may know nothing about legal stuff, but I work with press releases as part of my job everyday, and a good press release is headline or two, and then the rest of the statement backs up /enforces that headline(s) .
The body of this press release does nothing to back up that statement and instead says things to question it - like the part that I quoted - which DOES mention things either being time barred or unable to be proven.
Also the CAS and UEFA investigations were totally different... UEFA wanted info to enforce /build their case, whilst CAS would only require info based on what UEFA had. Surely you can see the cooperation with CAS would require a different type/level of involvement?
This totally gets away from my original point, which is that UEFA will find it nearly impossible to prosecute any club of breaching FFP from now on as clubs won't fully cooperate with their investigations going forward (unless they change the rules that force them to do so - which might happen)
So then there is no proof he's guilty? You know proof is important right. He also isn't a player and the op said all players were being paid twice.
The above seems relevant. Seems like a flaw in UEFAs rules if there's a 5 year leniency period.
City are unquestionably a bent corrupt football club, spending way above their actual means as they’re owned by a bloody state. (A very questionable one at that)
City are basically everything that’s wrong with modern football. Competition is being destroyed & results are just distorted by the vast vast unfair advantage that a football club has when its owned by a state.
I thought they didn't care about the champions league?
Thinking there was an agenda against city ffs
Different breed them lot.
Thinking there was an agenda against city ffs
Different breed them lot.Angry?
I'm having a ball, didn't expect City fans to go full Trump supporter mode, even with them being off the hook.We are aware you keep bolding the same headline, but where does it say this in the actual statement? Pretty sure you've been found not guilty based on insufficient evidence and the time barring, not exonorated.
Don't have to look far to find shady sponsor deals, off shore accounts ect. Please carry on though.
I don't know enough about this to form an educated opinion. From a purely legal standpoint City are probably innocent if that is the conclusion. "Law" and "ethics" are not the same thing. There will often be loopholes for skilled lawyers to exploit. Law has very little to do with justice.
None of this changes the fact that City are a club built on rotten money.
None of this changes the fact that City are a club built on rotten money.
I can't be bothered to catastrophize. First major test of the FFP rules. Teething problems.
If EUFA are smart, then they will change the FFP rules and procedures, going forward, to take account of the wording of CAS judgement.
Meanwhile we are in a good position to get back into the Champions League.
If EUFA are smart, then they will change the FFP rules and procedures, going forward, to take account of the wording of CAS judgement.
Meanwhile we are in a good position to get back into the Champions League.
The ruling does not change much and UEFA must have known that the allegations were out of time.
It doesn’t mean that they were untrue though, just too old to be punished for.
It doesn’t change the fact that City is owned by the appalling Abu Dhabi dictatorship with its terrible record on human rights in its own country and its part in the ongoing genocide in Yemen.
Very bad day for UEFA but what’s new about that?
FFP is now dead and plastic sportswashing clubs like City will become the norm.
It doesn’t mean that they were untrue though, just too old to be punished for.
It doesn’t change the fact that City is owned by the appalling Abu Dhabi dictatorship with its terrible record on human rights in its own country and its part in the ongoing genocide in Yemen.
Very bad day for UEFA but what’s new about that?
FFP is now dead and plastic sportswashing clubs like City will become the norm.
Not one bit surprised eventhough many here felt different. At the end of the day money talks.
Doesn't saying unable to be proven mean innocence and back up the headline. I mean that's exactly how people are found not guilty, there is no proof they are guilty. That's exactly how it works...
This guys not a thief because we can't prove he stole anything... I don't understand why the goalposts are moved for City.
So you only read the headline then?
It says that most of the alleged breaches was either not established or time-barred, i.e. in some cases it was established but time-barred and in other cases it was not established. Either the headline is just wrong or they should have added context in the statement that actually backs up the headline. Nothing in the statement implies that they could say with certainty that City did not disguise equity funding as sponsorship contributions.
This guy had admitted he stole in a private email, but it's been 5 years since he stole, so it doesn't count any more.
Being found not guilty doesn't mean you arn't guilty.
Did you read it!?
Why were UEFA not aware of the time barring provisions?
All but confirms that City are an oil club. Thats had to resort to technicalities to get off.
'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 5 year time period foreseen in the UEFA regulations.'
There you go,so much ado about nothing!!FFP is a joke!!I”m not worried about us qualifying for next seasons CL(we will finish top 4 definitely)....I”m more dissapointed that City haven’t been taken to task....
That's not what the judgement says though - it says most offences were either unproven or time-barred. So therefore some of the offences must have been neither unproven or time-barred. And the time-barred ones are still offences, you are just for some reason escaping punishment for them.
Basically until the full judgement is out we won't be able to understand what the division is between, unproven, time-barred, and neither. And where on earth this 5 year statute of limitations has come from.
City totally corrupt and getting away with it. As everyone expected and know.
What a shit year it has been. All the shit around the world, with a pandemic, australia burning, etc isn't bad enough. We have all the blatant corruption worldwide getting rewarded instead of punished. From Trump to Citeh. And the icing on the cake, Liverpool finally hit no 20. It's just so frustrating.
Angry?
We are aware you keep bolding the same headline, but where does it say this in the actual statement? Pretty sure you've been found not guilty based on insufficient evidence and the time barring, not exonorated.
Don't have to look far to find shady sponsor deals, off shore accounts ect. Please carry on though.
So you are saying not guilty does not equal not guilty? but its City fans who don't make sense.
Do you know how not guilty works? Its because you can't be proven guilty. If you are not guilty it means legally you didn't commit the crime.
Kinda how it works explained nice and quick for you dude.
Are we to believe you?1
No, I'm saying in these cases there will rarely be proof in this way. It's more about discerning what's a real payment and what's obviously a cover. I don't know anything about Mancini or the City players, but this is not a unique thing with City. If Shaw indeed got his weight's pay in sausages on the side it would naturally be masqued as a cosultant fee for his outstanding gastronomical services to a local Manchester butchery, which might happen to be owned by the wife of a school buddy of Woodward. The presumption of innocence isn't as black and white in these cases, especially when it's not a criminal case.
yep that'll do it - nothing like someone else backing up your own point so emphatically
Really, because it says allegations that weren't time barred were proven false..
Ha it’s obvious your sponsorship deals are inflated. You must know your club is dodgy as hell
It doesn't say that
I shall concede that point as we all know Mancini was most certainly not a consultant and I was just being awkward. That said it still doesn't mean every player at the club is being paid twice or any which the op tried to use the Mancini story as proof of.
Seriously, you'll always be corrupt and everyone knows that (except you, obviously). Just enjoy the trophies but stop pretending you're a proper football club anymore.
If I'm not mistaken, allegations that were time barred were ignored. Those that weren't were found guilty. Hence the 1 million fine.
City press release has just announced a multimillion deal for a new official club deodorant sponsor.