Yeah I get that just wondered if it had been released what exactly the time barred allegations were and what evidence of those charges there is.
What are to blabbering on about Terminator?
My point is blindingly obvious.
Everyone on this thread who has labelled city guilty despite yesterday’s announcement, has either
Not understood the verdict
Doesn’t care about the verdict
Is misrepresenting the verdict
No one, except Naby, has actually answered the questions that I’ve asked.
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 8 minutes ago
Do any City fans actually believe their club is innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An independent court has reviewed the evidence for periods not time barred and City have been declared innocent. It doesn't matter what any fan think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if you want to lecture opposition fans about the subject.
I don't agree with everything said on this thread from Liverpool fans, but I also think this attitude coming from City is a bit ridiculous as well.
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
comment by Imran The King Khan (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
But Rio passed his drug test and City were found not guilty by CAS, so that analogy doesn’t really work.
I get that it doesn’t look good from City’s perspective to be obstructing the process, but I do think UEFA’s process needs to be looked at seeing as an independent body has thrown out their charges.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he was punished for missing the test wasn't he? It was a long time ago but that's my recollection.
I wouldn't argue with the need for UEFA's process needing an overhaul. Two things we absolutely know for sure is that UEFA considered City guilty and that the charge couldn't be proven in court.
So from UEFA's perspective then their process simply can't be fit for purpose.
still think you didnt cheat
Naby,
What exactly did City dodge?
They went on the attack against UEFA as soon as the ban was announced. They were very vocal about what they thought of UEFA’s judgement and how UEFA handled it.
The club simply didn’t want to deal with UEFA. They went straight to CAS, to put forth their case in defence of the allegation. At the earliest opportunity.
No messing about. No time wasting. Straight to the point. No dodging of anything.
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
Not understood the verdict
Doesn’t care about the verdict
Is misrepresenting the verdict
No one, except Naby, has actually answered the questions that I’ve asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
probably a mixture of all 3.
i admire your optimism and patience in asking genuine questions and expecing sincere answers, but do you really think the posters having a pop give two sh!ts about the legitimacy of UEFA's case? do you think they actually care one bit about the case?
Yes he was punished for missing a test, a test he took a couple of hours after and passed. It was a ridiculous suspension, he was being made an example of.
It’s not really comparable with City’s obstruction of the investigation, given the time and actions both parties used.
But the similarities are that neither were found guilty of the initial charges. City’s punishment is pretty lenient in comparison to Rio’s, however.
I think UEFA’s process certainly needs transparency and consistency.
I think if CAS are overturning so many of UEFA’s verdicts we should be questioning just why UEFA are getting things so wrong, rather than questioning CAS’s own conduct.
Not saying you are, by the way. But there are many that have.
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 3 minutes ago
So many comments from fans of other clubs who are quick to judge but incredibly slow to justify why they think the way they do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I read you got off on technicalities, not because you were proven innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then I suggest you read more.
Probably not Don Draper’s.
But that kind of proves my point!!
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 5 minutes ago
Naby,
What exactly did City dodge?
They went on the attack against UEFA as soon as the ban was announced. They were very vocal about what they thought of UEFA’s judgement and how UEFA handled it.
The club simply didn’t want to deal with UEFA. They went straight to CAS, to put forth their case in defence of the allegation. At the earliest opportunity.
No messing about. No time wasting. Straight to the point. No dodging of anything.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say City dodged anything (I implied that of the Rio case), I said that City obstructed (the investigation). That was the findings of CAS.
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 1 minute ago
Probably not Don Draper’s.
But that kind of proves my point!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my advice - based on being dragged into similar nonsense before - is to quit whilst you are ahead, no good can come of humouring the trolls.
though naby8 is a good poster i agree.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
Then apologies Naby for saying that.
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 3 minutes ago
So many comments from fans of other clubs who are quick to judge but incredibly slow to justify why they think the way they do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I read you got off on technicalities, not because you were proven innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then I suggest you read more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“ 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.“
Yeah not proven innocent at all
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
Then apologies Naby for saying that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No apologies necessary Ripley - I specifically responded to your post as opposed to the general conversation because I've seen you post before - intelligent and considered contributions.
I don't have an axe to grind on this one and I'm interested in the response of City fans to the verdict.
A lot of mileage in this yet, particularly given the coverage since the verdict.
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City’s plan for winning the CL finally revealed
And are you typing with a straight face when you’re going on about preventing competition and rich clubs?
I think the CAS judgement, and the spiralling costs associated with elite football, demonstrate the current system is not sustainable.
FFP was in principle a good idea. But as Uefa is member led, FFP has been tailored to accommodate/protect the top clubs.
I'd love to see something like a US model (including salary caps, and entry draft) being implemented. But that's simply never happening.
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City’s plan for winning the CL finally revealed
And are you typing with a straight face when you’re going on about preventing competition and rich clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They’d still find a way to bottle the CL even in that unlikely scenario.
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s be interesting to see seeing as the G14 no longer exists.
comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Imran The King Khan (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
But Rio passed his drug test and City were found not guilty by CAS, so that analogy doesn’t really work.
I get that it doesn’t look good from City’s perspective to be obstructing the process, but I do think UEFA’s process needs to be looked at seeing as an independent body has thrown out their charges.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he was punished for missing the test wasn't he? It was a long time ago but that's my recollection.
I wouldn't argue with the need for UEFA's process needing an overhaul. Two things we absolutely know for sure is that UEFA considered City guilty and that the charge couldn't be proven in court.
So from UEFA's perspective then their process simply can't be fit for purpose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only that but they also tried to pursue charges going against their own regulations that had only gone for review to CAS last year (the time barred). That’s the most incompetent bit of all of it (at least until the full review comes out where I suspect there’ll be even more).
Thanks Naby, and thanks also for genuinely engaging and responding to my questions with good intentions, as opposed to the one sentence soundbite that so many others have chosen to adopt.
There is the technical aspect - the time barring aspect, and to be fair, city fans ignoring this aspect would be just as frustrating for opposition fans to read as it is hearing opposition fans focus ONLY on the time barring aspect.
Equally, it is frustrating to me to hear posters misrepresent the actual reason why City were fined 10 million euros.
No one, not a single poster, made any reference to this breach of rules - not complying with an investigation - until the fine itself was announced yesterday - and even then they are saying that this means City are guilty. That is simply a misrepresentation of the fine itself.
Everyone prior to the announcement (rightly) focused on the actual charge itself.
So many people since the announcement seem to have forgotten or ignored the actual charge itself. Instead focused on a fine (not relating to the charge) or the time barring (Insinuating that City got off on a technicality).
Not one person on this thread (or many others) have actually stated what CAS said in their very brief statement in regards to the charge itself.
And that is frustrating.
Melton said it yesterday. Too many are creating a narrative that is simply untrue.
Sign in if you want to comment
Hateful 8
Page 3 of 11
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 14/7/20
Yeah I get that just wondered if it had been released what exactly the time barred allegations were and what evidence of those charges there is.
posted on 14/7/20
What are to blabbering on about Terminator?
My point is blindingly obvious.
Everyone on this thread who has labelled city guilty despite yesterday’s announcement, has either
Not understood the verdict
Doesn’t care about the verdict
Is misrepresenting the verdict
No one, except Naby, has actually answered the questions that I’ve asked.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by mancini (U7179)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 8 minutes ago
Do any City fans actually believe their club is innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An independent court has reviewed the evidence for periods not time barred and City have been declared innocent. It doesn't matter what any fan think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It does if you want to lecture opposition fans about the subject.
I don't agree with everything said on this thread from Liverpool fans, but I also think this attitude coming from City is a bit ridiculous as well.
posted on 14/7/20
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
posted on 14/7/20
comment by Imran The King Khan (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
But Rio passed his drug test and City were found not guilty by CAS, so that analogy doesn’t really work.
I get that it doesn’t look good from City’s perspective to be obstructing the process, but I do think UEFA’s process needs to be looked at seeing as an independent body has thrown out their charges.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he was punished for missing the test wasn't he? It was a long time ago but that's my recollection.
I wouldn't argue with the need for UEFA's process needing an overhaul. Two things we absolutely know for sure is that UEFA considered City guilty and that the charge couldn't be proven in court.
So from UEFA's perspective then their process simply can't be fit for purpose.
posted on 14/7/20
still think you didnt cheat
posted on 14/7/20
Naby,
What exactly did City dodge?
They went on the attack against UEFA as soon as the ban was announced. They were very vocal about what they thought of UEFA’s judgement and how UEFA handled it.
The club simply didn’t want to deal with UEFA. They went straight to CAS, to put forth their case in defence of the allegation. At the earliest opportunity.
No messing about. No time wasting. Straight to the point. No dodging of anything.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
Not understood the verdict
Doesn’t care about the verdict
Is misrepresenting the verdict
No one, except Naby, has actually answered the questions that I’ve asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
probably a mixture of all 3.
i admire your optimism and patience in asking genuine questions and expecing sincere answers, but do you really think the posters having a pop give two sh!ts about the legitimacy of UEFA's case? do you think they actually care one bit about the case?
posted on 14/7/20
Yes he was punished for missing a test, a test he took a couple of hours after and passed. It was a ridiculous suspension, he was being made an example of.
It’s not really comparable with City’s obstruction of the investigation, given the time and actions both parties used.
But the similarities are that neither were found guilty of the initial charges. City’s punishment is pretty lenient in comparison to Rio’s, however.
I think UEFA’s process certainly needs transparency and consistency.
I think if CAS are overturning so many of UEFA’s verdicts we should be questioning just why UEFA are getting things so wrong, rather than questioning CAS’s own conduct.
Not saying you are, by the way. But there are many that have.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 3 minutes ago
So many comments from fans of other clubs who are quick to judge but incredibly slow to justify why they think the way they do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I read you got off on technicalities, not because you were proven innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then I suggest you read more.
posted on 14/7/20
Probably not Don Draper’s.
But that kind of proves my point!!
posted on 14/7/20
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 5 minutes ago
Naby,
What exactly did City dodge?
They went on the attack against UEFA as soon as the ban was announced. They were very vocal about what they thought of UEFA’s judgement and how UEFA handled it.
The club simply didn’t want to deal with UEFA. They went straight to CAS, to put forth their case in defence of the allegation. At the earliest opportunity.
No messing about. No time wasting. Straight to the point. No dodging of anything.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say City dodged anything (I implied that of the Rio case), I said that City obstructed (the investigation). That was the findings of CAS.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 1 minute ago
Probably not Don Draper’s.
But that kind of proves my point!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
my advice - based on being dragged into similar nonsense before - is to quit whilst you are ahead, no good can come of humouring the trolls.
though naby8 is a good poster i agree.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
posted on 14/7/20
Then apologies Naby for saying that.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 1 hour, 25 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 3 minutes ago
So many comments from fans of other clubs who are quick to judge but incredibly slow to justify why they think the way they do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From what I read you got off on technicalities, not because you were proven innocent?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then I suggest you read more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“ 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.“
posted on 14/7/20
Yeah not proven innocent at all
posted on 14/7/20
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
Then apologies Naby for saying that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No apologies necessary Ripley - I specifically responded to your post as opposed to the general conversation because I've seen you post before - intelligent and considered contributions.
I don't have an axe to grind on this one and I'm interested in the response of City fans to the verdict.
posted on 14/7/20
A lot of mileage in this yet, particularly given the coverage since the verdict.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City’s plan for winning the CL finally revealed
And are you typing with a straight face when you’re going on about preventing competition and rich clubs?
posted on 14/7/20
I think the CAS judgement, and the spiralling costs associated with elite football, demonstrate the current system is not sustainable.
FFP was in principle a good idea. But as Uefa is member led, FFP has been tailored to accommodate/protect the top clubs.
I'd love to see something like a US model (including salary caps, and entry draft) being implemented. But that's simply never happening.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
City’s plan for winning the CL finally revealed
And are you typing with a straight face when you’re going on about preventing competition and rich clubs?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They’d still find a way to bottle the CL even in that unlikely scenario.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
Let's see:
The UEFA Executive is made up of the CEO's of our major rivals.
The CAS panel was made up of 3 independent judges approved by both sides.
What club in their right mind would reveal commerically sensitive information to people who could illegaly benefit from it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I suspect that City may well sue the G14 out of existence, and the clubs within it can go to the wall with them if there is any justice. Restraint of Trade cartel designed to keep rich clubs rich and prevent competition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s be interesting to see seeing as the G14 no longer exists.
posted on 14/7/20
comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Imran The King Khan (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
But Rio passed his drug test and City were found not guilty by CAS, so that analogy doesn’t really work.
I get that it doesn’t look good from City’s perspective to be obstructing the process, but I do think UEFA’s process needs to be looked at seeing as an independent body has thrown out their charges.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he was punished for missing the test wasn't he? It was a long time ago but that's my recollection.
I wouldn't argue with the need for UEFA's process needing an overhaul. Two things we absolutely know for sure is that UEFA considered City guilty and that the charge couldn't be proven in court.
So from UEFA's perspective then their process simply can't be fit for purpose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only that but they also tried to pursue charges going against their own regulations that had only gone for review to CAS last year (the time barred). That’s the most incompetent bit of all of it (at least until the full review comes out where I suspect there’ll be even more).
posted on 14/7/20
Thanks Naby, and thanks also for genuinely engaging and responding to my questions with good intentions, as opposed to the one sentence soundbite that so many others have chosen to adopt.
There is the technical aspect - the time barring aspect, and to be fair, city fans ignoring this aspect would be just as frustrating for opposition fans to read as it is hearing opposition fans focus ONLY on the time barring aspect.
Equally, it is frustrating to me to hear posters misrepresent the actual reason why City were fined 10 million euros.
No one, not a single poster, made any reference to this breach of rules - not complying with an investigation - until the fine itself was announced yesterday - and even then they are saying that this means City are guilty. That is simply a misrepresentation of the fine itself.
Everyone prior to the announcement (rightly) focused on the actual charge itself.
So many people since the announcement seem to have forgotten or ignored the actual charge itself. Instead focused on a fine (not relating to the charge) or the time barring (Insinuating that City got off on a technicality).
Not one person on this thread (or many others) have actually stated what CAS said in their very brief statement in regards to the charge itself.
And that is frustrating.
Melton said it yesterday. Too many are creating a narrative that is simply untrue.
Page 3 of 11
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10