Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
It took Rangers 5 years to get back. I would be up for watching City having to do that.
I'm not saying that, I just think that there is no punishment that the PL/FA will be willing to hand out that fits the crime. Stripping them of titles and relegating them would need to just be the start of it. I don't see them being relegated one division never mind more.
Although financial penalties mean little stripping them of all the prize money for winning the titles and qualifying for the CL etc which they wouldn't have done otherwise needs taking away in the form of fines. The problem with even relegating them is that even if they were relegated and had to sell players they would get the money from those sales as 'fairly' raised revenue by the club which would give them a huge pot of legitimate money which would comfortably help them back.
My frustration is as much if not more with the PL as everyone has known for years that this is dodgy as **** but they have done nothing, in that time City have become close to self sustainable which wouldn't have happened without their cheating. If they are punished no matter how severe some might think it is, IMO it won't be harsh enough, as it has effectively nullified a decade of football. IMO the worst they'll suffer is a points deduction of 20-30 which will mean that the don't qualify for the CL for one season.
The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.
CAS won't overturn this one. Bye bye Citeh. Back to Gillingham away days for you
I thought one of the reasons they got away with it at CAS was a 5 year time limit on the offences? This email dates back almost 10 years right, so wouldn't make a difference to the outcome, I wouldn't have thought
I thought one of the reasons they got away with it at CAS was a 5 year time limit on the offences? This email dates back almost 10 years right, so wouldn't make a difference to the outcome, I wouldn't have thought
Some stuff was thrown out because it was time barred, there isn't a time limit on the PL rules, which given the pace the investigation is going is just as well
The only gracious way to accept an insult is to ignore it; if you can't ignore it, top it; if you can't top it, laugh at it; if you can't laugh at it, it's probably deserved.
The 5 year rule in and of itself wasn't ridiculous. The problem was that there was no caveat that the time limit was nullified by wilful obfuscation.
If UEFA fail to act for 5 years on something the club openly put in their accounts then fair enough but when there are deceptive practices to hide the true natire of the accounts then the 5 year rule should be binned double quick!
Some stuff was thrown out because it was time barred, there isn't a time limit on the PL rules, which given the pace the investigation is going is just as well
Ah interesting so that time limit may not apply here
"We've come to the end of our 5 year investigation and have found City have broken the rules. However after speaking to them, we are confident they will be good from now on. If not we will be forced to start a new 5 year investigation."
"We've come to the end of our 5 year investigation and have found City have broken the rules. However after speaking to them, we are confident they will be good from now on. If not we will be forced to start a new 5 year investigation."
Comment