And your evidence for this claim is..... Now... 1) The charges are substantiated. Citeh's only defences against the specific charges is that the evidence (their OWN correspondence) was possibly unlawfully obtained and it is somehow wrong that the body that sets the rules appears to be applying them. 2) The punishments proposed are - it seems to me - quite small. Financial penalties, or financial consequences of other penalties are insignificant to this lot 3) Other clubs vying for a place in the champions league seem to have understood the regulations well enough. City have more expensive lawyers than anyone else - perhaps Citeh should look at their behaviour. 4) If Citeh lose players because they cannot play in the champions league that doesn't say much for the contracts , or the players commitment.
Just to take you up on point 4 Bodbo. If this goes through they will lose players, and this doesn't have anything to do with their commitment - why should they show loyalty to a club which has tarnished them in this way ? Did Pep Guardiola know the way his club operates away from the pitch, or did he care ? Or is he the gullible part of this who concentrates on football and has blind trust in his employers - if it was the latter then he owes them nothing, because they have tarnished his name.
Without really knowing the full details I feel if Man City have broken some rules then they should be sanctioned like Saracens. I also feel that being tried by the football authorities who are out to get a bit club was perhaps not 100% objective. An appeal to an unbiased body may reduce the penalty or even make it worse! I don't worry about seeing City lose good players, they will go elsewhere so we won't miss them, might have room for one at Watford
Why do you think the football authorities are 'out to get a big club' Scully ? Unless it is meant as a warning to the rest (or perhaps a warning to the Premier League as a whole). They wouldn't be impressed if their Champions League final was between Young Boys of Bern and FC Genk - they need the big clubs, and they need them in the Champions League ! So why should they go after them if there was no case there ? Actually football as a whole doesn't need them - but that's another matter.
Everyone of us is governed by rules and regulations. It maybe driving our cars within specified speed limits, or paying the current taxes imposed by the government. Ignore those rules and if you are caught there will be a penalty. You might employ lawyers to find loopholes such as Beckham with his speeding, or accountants devising schemes to avoid paying into society, but that is to the disadvantage of others. All sports are the same. The governing bodies create rules, maybe to introduce VAR, or for the good of the whole game how much an individual club should spend, and if any sportsman or club breaks the rules, then they should be sanctioned.
The problem with the Man City case and others is sponsorship is a grey area with ill defined border cases open to various interpretations. Man City are entitled to seek that all evidence was considered in a fair and non biased way. There has been several well documented allegations of bribery against Uefa, not as bad as FIFA but still dodgy. Time will tell.
According to the BBC one of the arguments against the punishment that Man City's legal team will use is the lack of independence of the sanctioning body. As SH says, "time will tell." but, I suspect, the arguments will not end up about whether the rules have been breached, but rather about the right of sports bodies to impose sanctions when the rules have been breached.
This has nothing to do with the lack of independence of any governing body but rather the question 'are they guilty' - any evidence produced so far indicates that to be the case. If that is the case then the whole World of football should be against them for the cheating crooks that they are. By the whole World of football I mean everyone who loves the game including the bigwigs of the Premier League.
Yes I did rather throw that one in but expressed it badly. What I meant was that if they under contract to date x then their commitment shouldn't be altered at all by these developments until date x or the club indicates they are willing to let them leave.
I probably did not express myself well enough. If a big club, because they are a big wealthy club think they can break the rules then yes the authorities should sanction them which sends message that no matter how big and wealthy you are, you have to play by the rules. Of course no club should be got at if there is no justification. It does appear that City were less than helpful to the investigators so one has to ask why.
I tend to think there is something implicit in the contract regarding the honesty of both parties. The players signed believing that the club’s dealings were above board. Clubs often terminate contracts with players they feel are in breach.
Strange interview with Sterling draped in a Real Madrid shirt over his shoulders. Just think of the reaction if one of the overseas Man City players had done that! Is Raheem covering all bias just incase City don't win their Champions league appeal?
It doesn’t do his market value or salary demands any harm. I wouldn’t put any more store to it than that.