Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


eastynh last won the day on December 13 2019

eastynh had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

932 Excellent

1 Follower

About eastynh

  • Rank
    Pink haired hippie festival mode

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Newton upon the Heath

Recent Profile Visitors

5,899 profile views
  1. Bending the rules and breaking the rules are totally different things. City say they have done neither. I don't know what City have done, I have absolutely no idea. Innocent or guilty, I will still support them, as thats what fans do, you support your club through thick and thin. It is fair to say I have seen enough thin in my life when it comes to supporting City. This is fuck all in the grand scheme of things. When you have seen your team relegated to the third tier while your local rivals are winning doubles and trebles, this is a load of crap. Getting banned from the champions league because an owner put his own money into his own club is fuck all in comparison. Cheating is fixing matches and taking PED's, or even what Boston Red Sox have done. All City have done is what 90% of succesful clubs have done in the past. I don't give a toss really. I hope we get off on a technicality, just to boil some piss. Citys owners are confident it will be dropped and so am I. Right I am off to the match, while I sing fuck UEFA all night 😊
  2. What good is evidence if it does not proove anything? 🤷‍♂️
  3. There is no evidence what so ever that proves City have done anything wrong, not one single piece. Citys management have continually protested their innocence. Until as such time evidence appears that City have broken any rules then I will support them on this issue. As for the one down comment, its not very tatseful but I have heard and seen far things said between people and I would be lying if I pretended to actually give a fuck.
  4. Its a shit article, its just having a pop at City fans. Thats nothing new. City are adamant they have done nothing wrong. I believe the club until there is any evidence of wrong doing. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/51562352 Puma came out yesterday and said they believe the club. They have just signed a multi million pound deal with City. You would have thought that they would have done due dilligance. Same with Silver Lake.
  5. Neil you said that the emails were proof City had broken the rules, now you are saying they are not. As for the irrefutable evidence. City forwared it to the required body at UEFA. UEFA refused to look at it as it would have taken months for them to go through it properly. UEFA did not have months as they would have missed their own 5 year deadline, hence why City then refused to deal with UEFA. UEFA were given the evidence, they just refused to look at it. That was why City went to CAS before any judgement was given out. As shown to you, CAS have already said City's case is not without merit. You seem to be holding UEFA up as some paragon of virtue and City are cheating scoundrels. That is quite ironic as UEFA has repeatedly been seen to be riddled with corruption. Where is Mr Plattini now by the way? You just want City to be punished. What for you don't know. Anything will do for you.
  6. But they have not broken any rules. The emails do not prove that Manchester Citys OWNER directly broke the rules by using sponsorship deals to invest money into his club. You are right is is 100% obvious as there are documents in the public domain that it was infact the Anu Dhabi state and the City owners half brother who put the money into City on behalf of Etihad. Now you can whinge and moan as much as like, but that is not against any rules. You can say it is poor form, it is not in the spirit of the game, you can call it what eber you want, but it is not against any law, nor has it broken any FFP rule. Yesterday you claimed these emails were irrefutible evidence that City had broken FFP rules. Now you are saying it is bad faith. The emails prove absolutely nothing. In this country you would be laughed out of court if you tried to use them as evidence. Now this morning you were saying clubs should not be allowed to behave like c**ts them proceeded to brush what Liverpool are alleged to have done right under the carpet. You then tried to blame it on City. What Liverpool have apparently done is a criminal offence. What City have spparently done is not. Liverpool have given City one million pounds. City have totally denied all allegations and say they have an irrefutable body of evidence to clear their name. Now you can't be taken seriously, you just like to argue. That can be seen on muliple topics across all your forums. You spent god knows how long yesterday arguing about what CAS will and will not do? without evem having the foggiest idea what CAS actually do. Now you never answered my bet. £30 that City don't get any ban at all. You up for it?
  7. No they're not. How difficult is this to grasp? The emails do not prove in anyway what so ever that ADUG were the behind the payments to Manchester City. UEFA have already said that they will not release any of the evidence they used to find Manchester City guilty till after the CAS appeal.
  8. Conn stole his Guardian piece yesterday and wrote it as if it was his own work. Not only was in deliberstely misleading but it was a blatant lie.
  9. You have still shown me no evidence of City breaking any FFP rules. Not one single piece.
  10. Yes Neil, thats why Liverpool paid City 1 millin pounds, because City were shit at protecting their systems. So after all that, at present we are both clear that currently there is absolutely no evidence what so ever than Manchester City have broken any rules? Not a single one.
  11. Neil here is the crux of the issue. The Etihad deal is under scrutiny as it UEFA say it is over inflated due to it the deal being disguised as owner investment, do we agree on that? Now Der Spigel are suggesting from the hacked emails that the vast majority of the Etihad deal was paid for by Sheikh Mansour and the ADUG, Sheikh Mansour is City's owner. The problem here is that is just Der Spiegels interpretation of the emails. The emails do not show that it was Sheikh Mansour at all who put the money directly into City's accounts. If it can be proved that Sheikh Mansour did in fact put the money into City's accounts then I totally agree with you, City have broken the rules and should be banned. The problem you have is that there is evidence which proves that it was in fact the Abu Dhabi executive council that put the money into City's accounts, not Sheikh Mansour. The emails suggest that it was someone called HH who paid the money. Protocol suggests that the only person who is referred to as HH without their name following in the UAE is the president. So City's owner has not inflated the sponsorship deal as the money did not come from him. Now the issue is that could it be considered that the executive council is a related party to Manchester City. This is not even an issue really as related parties are allowed to sponsor their clubs as long as it is fair value. UEFA have already judged the Etihad deal to be fair value as per their criteria and this was backed up by independent bodies, namely Octagon and PWC. Where Etihad gets its money from is of no business to UEFA as long as it has not come from Sheikh Mansour. There is no evidence of this. Have City broken any rules? No. The stolen emails don't prove this at all. Have they been clever? Absofuckinglutely. Still not broken any rules though and there has been absolutely no evidence what so ever produced to confirm they have. Now seeing as you are calling clubs c**ts and no club should get away with being a c**t, tell me how you feel about Liverpool hacking City's systems? Which may I remind you is not just breaking rules but actually against the law. The difference between the City case and Liverpool is that Liverpool have actually made a payment to City in respect of the hack. Do you think Liverpool should be investigated and a possible criminal investigation? Which offence do you think is worse? An illegal act allegedly carried out by Liverpool or a possible bending of a rule that you yourself don't actually agree with. Just seeing as we are talking about football clubs that behave like c**ts.
  12. Lets have a bet Neil, nothing ridiculous. Say £30. If City get bannedd for any period of time then I will put that towards your website upkeep. If City don't get banned then you give it to MacMillan nurses. We are just going round in circles snd it will start getting boring for everyone else.
  13. Neil you could not even get what the fair value test is about correct and were totally wrong yesterday. You made up an absolutely ridiculous scenario in your own head.You seem to think a national government can't prop up its own national airline and UEFA can rule on that. How can I take you seriously? At least do a little reasearch before opening your mouth. You also did not even know what CAS actually do and were still popping off as if you knew what you were talking about. Have you even read the blog? It is by a lawyer, not some journalist with an axe to grind. That blog is not pro City. It just highlights some interesting facts. Namely one being the double jeopardy rule wjere City signed agreements that they could not be done for anything pre 15th May 2014. UEFA state that they were kooking at offences from the period 2012-16, which they can't do.You seemed to think they could, which was again totally wrong. You have not even read the blog. UEFA have absolutely no right to investigate City on anything before May 15th 2014 and have signed agreements to the effect. If they have found infringements after that date then UEFA are well within their rights to investigate City.
  14. To be fair Gnom I have not defended them. I have said from the off that I do not know whether City have done anything wrong. UEFA have been extremely vague in their charges and why they have reached their conclusion. The rest of us do not have a clue. Only City, Uefa and to an extent CAS have any idea of the facts. I can only go off Citys statements where they totally deny any wrong doing and they have irrefutable evidence to prove their innocence. I have also reiterated my total disdain for the FFP rules. Neil just likes to argue and we went right round the houses just to come to the conclusion that none of us have a ckue what is going on yet. I believe City, why would I not at this point? There has been no evidence produced to suggest they have done anything wrong as of yet.
  15. An interesting article, be interested on your thoughts Neil. This is by a lawyer with no link to either City or UEFA. https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-manchester-city-uefa-go-to-war/
  • Create New...