Post Reply to Clark's Pitch

This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

Message:

HTTP Link (optional):

Poster's Email (optional):

 


Post being replied to

Not really. And there wasn't cooking of those books audited by CuzTeahan

by independent third parties and UEFA.

Even if one accepts the hacked emails selectively released on their face, and that City are not allowed a defense in explaining context for those emails, and that it is OK that the ajudicatory body leaks information and findings to the press prior to judgement, none of that matters. UEFA auditors certified Etihad as an unrelated party and the sponsorship fees paid as fair market value, so how they are funded through interlocking companies wouldn't be relevant.

Worse though, this process and associated smear campaigns have been corrupt from the outset without due process or fairness. If CAS doesn't exonerate City, they will rightly take this outside the sports system to the Swiss courts.

For a counterexample, see the FA's dismissal of Liverpool hacking City scouting computers or their evaluation and treatment under FFP when they failed several years ago.