Nothing in there about his personal situation, perhaps unsurprisingly. But I can’t help but wonder why the club are having him front this if they were planning to manoeuvre him out after the window, given the charges. Maybe the club statement in response to THST tomorrow will be more revealing. We live in hope.
Interesting. I watched it on the website. The tweet is still up but when you click, it says the content isn’t available in my territory (I’m in the US). Wonder if they’ve taken it down or made it private or something.
It’s a pretty generic interview in which the questions and answers feel pre-planned but I’m glad it was Fabio still doing it, I’m hopeful it implies he’s continuing to do his role for the time being, we definitely need him to be. Nice to see him talk about Udogie though and implying he’ll be in the squad next season. I think a lot of fans are not only excited about his talent but also with the hope his arrival can push Sessegnon out the door. I think/ hope the next phase for Paratici is trying to remove the deadwood in Sessegnon, Emerson, Sanchez etc and rebuild the central part of defence (should’ve been at least part done in January mind) and also a sign new keeper, with ideally Spence and Udogie joining Porro and Perisic in the WB roles. If Fabio’s ban does get extended beyond Italy though, it could get a bit grim and throw a real spanner in the works. Fingers crossed it won’t.
I read somewhere that the Italian authorities are going to wait on the outcome of the appeal before pressing ahead with having it extended throughout UEFA/FIFA (providing the ban's upheld), so that uys us and him some time...but if a ban is upheld, he's gone.
As an expert in the Italian legal system after watching numerous episodes of the documentary Inspector Montalbano, it's safe to assume it'll be a long, drawn-out process in no small part because the head of the investigation is having lunch or boinking the new girl who arrived in town
You can almost hear the board's eyerolling when faced with this question from the THST please log in to view this image
Are you lot still happy to keep Paratrice after what has been disclosed and the charges against him or do your morals only apply to other clubs?
As far as I understand it he has not admitted to wrong doing and has appealed against his ban. If there is evidence available to the Club that suggests this will be unsuccessful then he is being untruthful and should be suspended until the outcome of the appeal is known. If not I would be happy to await the outcome of the appeal and then judge all the evidence as to whether he is a person we should employ even if he is successful.
As of now the prosecutors haven’t released the full reasoning for the verdict (I think that is due tomorrow?) and naturally there will be an appeals process which will no doubt bring more information to light. To my understanding there are two issues around him. The first is around inflated valuations of players included in cash + player swaps. The case for the defence is that it’s impossible to truly value a player because the value of a player has too many qualitative values. A player is not a house. While the actions that have led to this charge are clearly not in the spirit of the regulations, neither is for example the creative accounting that clubs do when amortizing transfer fees, and everyone does that, it’s standard practice. So while it’s sketchy and I wouldn’t want him doing it at Spurs, I have less of a problem with it. It’s also worth noting that multiple other Italian clubs are being investigated for the same thing, so the appeals process may get messy especially if Juve are punished more than other clubs who have been undertaking the same practices. The more dubious one is around Covid wages and involves side letters some players signed along with their contracts that led to them either not deferring or foregoing wages, contrary to a club statement that they would be. As Juve is a publicly listed entity, this activity was fully illegal in Italy as public statements of a public entity I believe cannot then be contravened in such a way as it misleads investors. If it’s the case he was involved in this then I would support removing him from the club.
Deliberately using inflated values for assets is fraud and always has been. Amortisation of assets across their expected life is completely standard accounting practice.
"2. The manager employed by the Club has not signed a new contract and tells us that we should lower our expectations about on-field outcomes. He has said publicly that the Club needs to spend big money every window just to compete. How does this align with the Board’s philosophy for achieving success?" Not surprised the answer had the slight undertone of 'Bugger off' to it