100000000000006 Great comedy Man City moments

Originally Posted by ScarFace

They got away with it due to the 5 year rule ( any crimes over that are ignored )

That in itself is £#%&!ing absurd.

Originally Posted by ScarFace

They got away with it due to the 5 year rule ( any crimes over that are ignored )

why do you think they failed to comply and dragged it out as long as they did. They're not stupid.

According to the Guardian, city chose two of the three judging panel. The chairman is supposed to be independent but they selected him and UEFA didn’t object. It’s blatant that money has changed hands to get them off the ban.

So you don’t have to actually get away with it, you just have to get away with it long enough?

Is the rest of football just going to sit back and tolerate this when they’ve been trying to compete with one hand tied behind their backs? Chelsea got a worse punishment for tapping up academy kids ffs. 9 lawyers.

Originally Posted by lenin

According to the Guardian, city chose two of the three judging panel. The chairman is supposed to be independent but they selected him and UEFA didn’t object. It’s blatant that money has changed hands to get them off the ban.

Curly watts was the other one

Uefa are hopelessly outmatched. Their job is to oversee football; they’re not the FBI. The second they had their first major FFP challenge they had no answer To City’s corruption. They should make it a requisite to compete that their word is final - no arbitration, no challenges, because If they can’t enforce it for all, they have to drop it.

Originally Posted by utd99

Uefa are hopelessly outmatched. Their job is to oversee football; they’re not the FBI. The second they had their first major FFP challenge they had no answer To City’s corruption. They should make it a requisite to compete that their word is final - no arbitration, no challenges, because If they can’t enforce it for all, they have to drop it.

What they should do is expel City completely. If you refuse to abide by the rules, or by the verdict of the governing body, then you don't want to take part in the competition. GTFO.

Originally Posted by dunk

What they should do is expel City completely. If you refuse to abide by the rules, or by the verdict of the governing body, then you don't want to take part in the competition. GTFO.

They tried, City just sent in the lawyers and greased the right palms. I’m normally down on uefa and fifa, but in this instance they tried, but it was a middleweight vs a heavyweight. These guys are professional crooks with a nation sized budget and diplomatic friends. Uefa have no chance.

Originally Posted by utd99

They tried, City just sent in the lawyers and greased the right palms. I’m normally down on uefa and fifa, but in this instance they tried, but it was a middleweight vs a heavyweight. These guys are professional crooks with a nation sized budget and diplomatic friends. Uefa have no chance.

No they banned them. I mean just completely expel them from being members of UEFA.

i know we're all going to roll our eyes and sort of joke about the absurdity of this but £#%&!ing hell how utterly disheartening is it?

To have all this stuff laid out there and City are laughing in everyone's faces getting away with it.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

i know we're all going to roll our eyes and sort of joke about the absurdity of this but £#%&!ing hell how utterly disheartening is it?

To have all this stuff laid out there and City are laughing in everyone's faces getting away with it.

And most of our "football journalists" actually cheering it on. They make the Westminster lobby pack actually appear moral in comparison.

Had a quick read, seems like UEFA rushed the case because of the time barring issue, were hindered by City every step of the way and didn’t provide enough evidence outside of the leaked emails. So the time barring undermined the entire investigation combined with the the difference in resources between City and UEFA. It’s £#%&!ing scandalous, they were bang to rights and they knew it.

If you don’t cooperate then the sentence should be the same as the substantive charge otherwise nobody would ever cooperate if guilty.

Bet Rio wishes he had had those Lawyers

Originally Posted by The Stella Fella

If you don’t cooperate then the sentence should be the same as the substantive charge otherwise nobody would ever cooperate if guilty.

Bet Rio wishes he had had those Lawyers

Yep. The immediate conclusion when they refuse to cooperate is they have something to hide, surely?

Originally Posted by lenin

According to the Guardian, city chose two of the three judging panel. The chairman is supposed to be independent but they selected him and UEFA didn’t object. It’s blatant that money has changed hands to get them off the ban.

Have just finished reading all 93 pages of it. Yes, sad I know. Looks like UEFA fielded their youth team; and went for a quick victory. Two bad tactical decisions. As was letting City chose 2 of the 3 - as it was a majority decision and not unanimous. The majority said there was insufficient evidence to show that what was proposed in the damning emails was put into effect. City refused to provide the whole emails trails and no doubt those may well have put the matter beyond doubt and sunk them. UEFa, however, did not pusue an application to force City to disclose them because it would have extended the process into next season and they wanted a quick outcome to the appeal .......

Scandalous. Can’t the Premier league do anything? After all, the CL wasn’t the only tournament they were in while they were breaking all these rules; and it seems the clubs themselves want something done.

Originally Posted by utd99

Scandalous. Can’t the Premier league do anything? After all, the CL wasn’t the only tournament they were in while they were breaking all these rules; and it seems the clubs themselves want something done.

City are still under investigation by the PL

Decent thread from Nick Harris.

https://twitter.com/sportingintel/status/1288156083694051329

To my surprise, there has been a bit of proper coverage of this and not just the usual sycophancy. Worm turning just slightly?

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

To my surprise, there has been a bit of proper coverage of this and not just the usual sycophancy. Worm turning just slightly?

You can't defend the indefensible more like.

Before it was all dismissed as people being bitter or jealous.. now it's there in black and white.

This will stick to them, no matter how they strut about demanding apologies.