He does it all the time. He's an utter prick, and I've said this from the first season he came to the PL - notwithstanding his successes.
I reckon they'll get it overturned. They seem incredibly confident in the language that they've used so far. You can say that they would deny it but they could use a standard club statement for that rather than rolling out the CEO to say things like 'irrefutable evidence'. You don't do that unless you believe that imo. If they don't then they're gonna look really ****ing stupid anyway.
When he first started his in this country he was mischievous and caused a lot of fume (thought you would appreciate ) It was always about Jose but at some point it turned toxic, he never bothered me like he bothers many others, i just think its sad he cant get back to where he was. Was reading somewhere that since going to Spurs his re ord is 3rd best in league, and to be fair he has had a terrible run of injuries. That interview yesterday though was strange. Anyway, he isnt our gaffa so not that fuss3d
I reckon the language used is a bluff tbh, these guys are not used to being told what to do and have enough money to deal with any problems usually. As far as im aware they are bang to rights on the financial doping. Their argument is the evidence against them was obtained illegally. Im no hiag but im confident a ban will be given, i think thats why uefa gave them 2years, to cover any reductions. Im guessing a years ban. Where does it leave the game if although guilty of finacial doping, they get off on a technicality. For me that sends the message that teams can cheat by pumping endless cash into clubs but be more careful about getting caught from now on? Whats your take if they receive no punishment?
That's not entirely correct mate. Their main argument is that they're not guilty of what they've been accused off, whilst also attacking the process (eg. Allegedly ignoring the evidence City submitted). Teams get away with financial doping all of the time, it's part of the game.
Yeah, that was just to cause fume, like i say that doesn't bother me Never did I even understood the Neville badge business Just different viewpoints lol Have to say though sucky, that i could imagine you doing that if you were manager at a club, he was almost smiling as the officials got to him
Guess we will see bro. I hope uefa throw them out of europe for 4 years for not taking the 2 years and the prem follows suit and sends them down to the 3rd division. Forever
I cant stand him mate. Hate bad losers and hes one of the worst in the business. Glad he's a washed up manager at a bang average team. Fully deserves it.
It's #nailedon a bluff. Their only statement is that the emails were taken "out of context", followed by complete silence of refusing to say what context they should be taken in. Their "irrefutable evidence" is just a letter saying "I'm a member of the royal family and head of state and I'm telling you I did nothing wrong".
It's none of that for me. Winding up the opposition is fair enough, although a little irresponsible when this stuff can spill over into violence. It's his ego and smugness that always irritated me - his readiness to take the credit for success and his willingness to publicly humiliate his players when they fail. This is the attitude of a petulant child, not an adult.
Part of the reason for the ban was that they refused to cooperate with the investigation. If they have "irrefutable evidence" now, why didn't they present it at the appropriate time? This in itself is a sign of arrogance or guilt, or both, and the ban should be upheld for that alone, imo. Like others, I think their defiance is a bluff - born of outrage that anyone dares to interfere with them. This is an expected attitude from people who go through life getting exactly what they want all the time and are unused to being thwarted. Their usual method is just to buy off people who oppose them - allegedly . I do wonder whether UEFA has the balls to stand up to them, as in the past it's hardly shown itself to be the incorruptible institution it ought to be.
there is no deadline but in a case like this they normally try to have decisions done prior to the punishment comes into effect which in this case prior to the start of the season . The only precedent i've seen is the 2 year ban UEFA gave to AC Milan which following new evidence submitted by Milan to the CAS arbitration system led to a recommendation that a 1 year ban was more appropriate and that was agreed by all parties.
