- Nov 12, 2007
fucking awesome if this sticks. everybody knew they were doing this with Etihad money which is of course the same as the owners money
lord knows we are due after Chelsea took our spot.Love it.
If we get CL coming 5th due to City's ban it will be the least 'Spurs' moment in history.
...cue Sheffield Utd pipping us on GD due to a pigeon deflecting a goal-bound shot wide on the last day of the season.
Remember Palace fans producing a banner criticising Abramovich and how he is ruining the game. Did it kickstart an uprising? Nope, Palace got fined by the premier leagueIt's such a shame that we as fans, and by that I mean fans of all the clubs, never seem to find ways of uniting against the way football has been corrupted.
Imagine if fans simply didn't buy away tickets when their clubs played Man City. Essentially boycott Man City games. It wouldn't have much of a financial impact, but it would still be noteworthy.
So sad that it just simply won't happen. It's one of the reasons football has so easily been taken over by the likes of the Al-Nahyans.
Well, seeing as it’s their competition, I suspect they can take on and comfortably beat anyone who plays within it.Will be surprised if this judgment is not overturned. City like some others have too much money to throw at lawyers. As for the Premier doing anything there is no chance as they can’t take on an oil nation
You could be right, but the thing that will stick in most people's throat is that by successfully avoiding the sanctions in this way it will be a green light to all the financially doped clubs that FFP can be circumvented in almost every case if you buy your way around the process and legal rules that attempt to enforce this. If they win the appeal in this way then never before will the phrase cheats never prosper seem so redundant.I see a lot posts stating that "they are guilty".
As I understand it, it isn't a question of "did they do it or not?" The facts do not appear to be in dispute.
It's a question of "is what they did a violation of the rules or not?" Specifically, should the sponsorship from Etihad be considered separately from the ownership of the Mansours, or does the undisputed fact that the Mansours own Etihad mean that they are evading the regulations?
As many have already observed, the appeal will not be decided on that question. Either it will be decided on fine points of procedural failure by UEFA, without bearing directly on the merits of the original finding, it will be decided by the Mansours bribing or extorting the fuck out of the main characters at UEFA.
What is highly unlikely is that the initial judgment will be upheld on its merits. Too many expensive lawyers for that.