- This topic has 302 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Threeps – not sure your analysis is entirely right. It had nothing to do with suspicion and more to do with hubris. The organisation made serious accusations and instigated punitive action against the accused. It was shown evidence by its appointed experts that pointed to innocence of the accused ( i.e. there was a duff IT system that caused the issues) and which rubbished any suspicion. Such evidence wasn’t accepted by the organisation and it carried on blaming and persecuting the soon to be deemed innocent parties. The offending organisation just made its mind up that it was right and its IT system was working so it was obvious who was wrong. The accusations and action it took had dreadful consequences for many of those it accused whilst internal potential whistle blowers were threatened with dismissal as is usual in such cases. It was only when the matter eventually went to Court that the truth came out and acceptance of wrongdoing was made by the accuser.
I don’t want to draw exact parallels with the case we’re all interested in, I’m just trying to demonstrate that sometimes organisations don’t wish to acknowledge reality because the priority is self protection, and that could apply to either UEFA or City (or more likely both). I think suspicion is not the right term to use at any point in the case I tried to describe but rather brazen and inappropriate defence of self interest might be nearer the mark. What you say in your last sentence is right looking at it from City’s view but there is an even bigger issue to deal with here. Sadly, we all know that professional sport is intrinsically bent and it seems unlikely that will change when this case is a distant memory._____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Brilliant video!!
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
And we’re back to Godwin’s Law… π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
You make good points so thank you for taking the time to explain it in such detail. And as you said earlier they could be relevant to either party. If this does go belly up for UEFA they’ll have really made themselves look even worse than they have done before.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Nobody is coming out of this smelling of roses, just one side slightly stinkier than the other…
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
In my view, amusing yes but rather a sad, pathetic article in the Daily Fail….
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
But the Daily Fail didn’t write it, they just published it! It was a proper Moonie who wrote it!
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Can somebody tell Adolf to please leave United out of this all,its all City,nowt to do with United?
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adlab-Der Spiegel is not Bayerns mouthpiece,how many times do we have to tell you? Are you really sure you are not 16?
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Chucky – yep, I realise it was written by a City follower. It’s still a poor effort in my view.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Very funny video…just trying to count up how many of the quotes were made by our very own Adlab!!
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Extract from another article. It will come out in court.
“As outlined above, though, it appears as though Uefa were actually under significant pressure from outside sources to make an example of Manchester City.
According to Matt Slater of the reliable Athletic, a number of European heavyweights pushed the governing body towards their eventual decision.
These clubs included the likes of Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Paris Saint-Germain.
Cityβs Premier League rivals, meanwhile, are also said to have been involved.”
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adders, anything that says “it appears” and “are also said” are phrased as such so they can’t be sued for libal (i.e. protection for purely speculating!).
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adlab, and why wouldn’t they? If they’ve had to pull back their own spending in order to comply themselves, they’ve every right to want those not doing so to be punished.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Exactly. If Liverpool or Utd had been allowed to spend more in the time between 2012 and now, maybe we’d have 1 or even 2 extra titles each. I think Liverpool came close to infringing on FFP rules some years ago but corrected the matter. What if we decided not to and just broke the rules, would you say that we shouldn’t be punished? City beat us to the title by very small margins. Maybe 1 extra player makes the difference over a season.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
That’s it Mak. Chelsea another one who would have no doubt spent more. Who’s to say there wouldn’t have been another Sheikh coming along and ploughing money into a club like City? The fact is they couldn’t do that because of FFP. Nothing unreasonable at all about those clubs encouraging action from Uefa.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
I think I posted among those that “disappeared” earlier this week, I still don’t understand how City have claimed “irrefutable evidence of their innocence” yet failed to present it at the supposed Kangaroo Court. If I had prove I was 100% innocent I would have shown it at the beginning and nipped the whole thing in the bud.
Now, it seems the whole “defense” is based on how the evidence was found (still not sure how that implies innocence?) and the fact the everybody else is doing it (which they undoubtedly are, but they haven’t got caught yet, so again, not sure how that implies innocence).
And yes, if the football boot was on the other foot, we know City would be “pushing” for the same punishment to other clubs.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Chucky, whatever they say won’t matter if they can overturn the ban, by any means. They get off on a technicality?… it won’t matter, that is the same as saying they are innocent. That’s what their fans will be parroting. I mean just look at what bias is doing to rational thought already.
This “irrefutable evidence” talk is very interesting alright. The only possible reason that I can think of that they didn’t show it to UEFA was to withhold it and bring it to the CAS in order undermine and destabilize UEFA… but this is way too “crafty” an avenue to go down when so much is at stake. It would honestly be an incredibly stupid move. I definitely don’t consider it to be a genuine possibility.
It has to be nonsense to keep people from panicking, while they work on their appeal.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Special-K, don’t think anybody would be buying the “we’re innocent cause we got off on a techno!” excuse. Every man, dog, and tortoises called Alan, know getting away with a techno means you just “screwed” the system.
They will be forever known as OJ City if that works!! π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Adlab, you can’t tell everyone to wait until the hearing goes to CAS and then try and dig up every article that you think might add some credibility to City overturning the ban.
As the other lads on here have said if other Clubs believed City were spending above their means as a Club under FFP whilst they all followed the FFP rules then they had every right to raise that with UEFA.
Everyone knew what the FFP rules were and signed up to them City included.
I do though think City have the right to Appeal and have their case judged by an impartial body but if that goes against them and they are found guilty by CAS and the sanctions are upheld that should be the end of it and City fans will have to accept the Club’s punishment.
But it’s all in CAS’s hands now and none of us exactly know what evidence will be presented or what the legal arguments may be.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.