| Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065025] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:08 |
|
Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
Milan - 15 point penalty
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065028 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:15 |
|
Benny ha scritto:
What a wonderful day...
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065034 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:24 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065039 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:28 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : anders t <anthu_001 [at] No€SPaM€_hotmail.com>
>Quoting Benny in rec.sport.soccer:
>>Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
>>Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
>>Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
>>Milan - 15 point penalty
>
>Can there be a case made that UEFA has Italy losing the Europa cup
>coeffients gained by the teams in question, too?
That's upto UEFA.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065050 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:47 |
|
Benny wrote:
> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
Forfeit last two titles:
> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
> Milan - 15 point penalty
And apparently docked 44 points from last year's total.
So who is awarded the last two titles? Or are they considered vacant?
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065053 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:51 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:47:46 GMT, JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com> wrote:
>So who is awarded the last two titles? Or are they considered vacant?
I would think so.
Something similar happened to Torino, I heard, in 1927.
Their title was stripped for match-fixing, and it was vacated.
--
http://futuremd.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065054 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:51 |
|
Benny wrote:
> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
> Milan - 15 point penalty
I don't see why Milan can't challenge for a title next season. They
finished 12 points ahead of third place Inter last season and Juve is
out of the picture. It won't be easy, but hardly impossible.
(Plus no CL distraction, right?)
--
JK
http://my-morning-song.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065055 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:53 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:51:05 GMT, JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com> wrote:
>I don't see why Milan can't challenge for a title next season. They
>finished 12 points ahead of third place Inter last season and Juve is
>out of the picture. It won't be easy, but hardly impossible.
>
>(Plus no CL distraction, right?)
That's my thinking too. It depends on who stays, however. Kaká is sure
to leave, they say.
BTW, Felipe Scolari stays on with Portugal for 2 years!! What a
newsday.
(I'm sure a Portuguese person will post the news separately)
--
http://futuremd.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065057 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:52 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com>
>
>And apparently docked 44 points from last year's total.
Yes, that's why they're not in the Champions League.
>So who is awarded the last two titles?
In theory Milan in 2004-2005 and Inter in 2005-2006 (because of Milan's
44 point penalty).
> Or are they considered vacant?
I would guess they're vacant.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065059 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:54 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com>
>I don't see why Milan can't challenge for a title next season. They
>finished 12 points ahead of third place Inter last season and Juve is
>out of the picture. It won't be easy, but hardly impossible.
>
>(Plus no CL distraction, right?)
Yep. The only problem is the physiological effect of starting on
-15 points but of course it could make the players more determined.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065063 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:56 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : Benny <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com>
>Yep. The only problem is the physiological effect of starting on
>-15 points but of course it could make the players more determined.
That should real psychological not physiological.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065066 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 21:44 |
|
"Benny" <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> wrote in message news:02lWx+AJz+tEFwGq [at] mail.soccer-europe.com...
> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
> Milan - 15 point penalty
>
I assume all teams are banned from Europe for this year. Is that true?
What happens to the Serie A titles from the last couple of years?
Erdal
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065070 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:12 |
|
Benny wrote:
> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
> Milan - 15 point penalty
>
> http://soccer-europe.com
> Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
Quite painful. Also Juve is stripped of their last two titles and all
are out of Champions League and UEFA cup.
They have until 25th to appeal.
Just keep polishing that WC trophy for a couple years and try not to
get any tear stains on it.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/5164194.stm>
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065082 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:20 |
|
The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
retain their Serie A status.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065088 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:26 |
|
Benny wrote:
> The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
> retain their Serie A status.
>
> http://soccer-europe.com
> Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
A gift! They should all write thank you letters!
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065092 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:36 |
|
Richard Adams wrote:
> Benny wrote:
>
>>The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
>>retain their Serie A status.
>>
>> http://soccer-europe.com
>> Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
>
>
> A gift! They should all write thank you letters!
Seriously!
--
JK
http://my-morning-song.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065095 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:49 |
|
JK wrote:
> Richard Adams wrote:
> > Benny wrote:
> >
> >>The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
> >>retain their Serie A status.
> >>
> >> http://soccer-europe.com
> >> Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
> >
> >
> > A gift! They should all write thank you letters!
>
> Seriously!
>
Dear Cheaters,
Thank you for getting caught and saving us the humiliation of going
where you are going.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065099 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 22:54 |
|
Benny wrote:
> The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
> retain their Serie A status.
Too bad. They could have used this as an ideal opportunity to move back
to an 18 team league, which , I think, you and most Serie A fans prefer.
(Don't think it makes a huge difference myself, but let's not get
started on that).
>
> http://soccer-europe.com
> Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065102 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 23:01 |
|
Benny <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> writes:
>> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
>> From : JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com>
>>
>>And apparently docked 44 points from last year's total.
>
> Yes, that's why they're not in the Champions League.
This is bad for the Champions' League. I do want to see corruption punished,
but I don't want the CL weakened like this.
R.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065104 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 23:06 |
|
Sez Richard Adams <ackthpt [at] concentric.net>
>
>
> A gift! They should all write thank you letters!
And address it to whom?
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065106 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 23:13 |
|
Rolleston wrote:
> Benny <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> writes:
>>> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
>>> From : JK <jknapp [at] oacpc.com>
>>>
>>> And apparently docked 44 points from last year's total.
>>
>> Yes, that's why they're not in the Champions League.
>
> This is bad for the Champions' League. I do want to see corruption
> punished, but I don't want the CL weakened like this.
Weakens? In what way? A team that cheats to achieve success won't be
in the Champions League! Sounds like good news to me.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065107 ] |
Fri, 14 July 2006 23:12 |
|
MH wrote:
> Benny wrote:
> > The bottom three Serie A clubs i.e. Messina, Lecce and Treviso will
> > retain their Serie A status.
>
> Too bad. They could have used this as an ideal opportunity to move back
> to an 18 team league, which , I think, you and most Serie A fans prefer.
> (Don't think it makes a huge difference myself, but let's not get
> started on that).
>
> >
> > http://soccer-europe.com
> > Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
Considering they need to have their schedule ready for the new season,
keeping up 3 clubs means those clubs could simply take their place in
the schedule.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065125 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 00:00 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:08:07 GMT, Benny <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com>
wrote:
>Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
Worse than the previously suggested relegation to C1 with a 6 point
penalty. This throws them right into a relegation battle that it's
going to be very difficult to escape from, looking at the 04/05 Serie
B table.
>Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
Probable promotion, likely automatic.
>Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
Might struggle to make the playoffs.
>Milan - 15 point penalty
I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the judge and say Milan are
reprieved because of the problems of working out who to add to Serie A
for 06/07 if four clubs are relegated.
A cynic would blame the influence of Berlusconi.
This won't keep Milan out of European competition in 07/08, and
probably not out of the Champions League. The scudetto may prove
elusive.
All predictions assume the clubs keeping most of their top players,
and the league promotion/relegation structure not changing...
--
James Farrar
. [at] gmail.com
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065127 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 00:13 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:44:05 -0500, "Erdal Paksoy" <paksoy [at] ti.com>
wrote:
>
>What happens to the Serie A titles from the last couple of years?
This year's title is not assigned
2004/05 has been stripped from Juventus and proably won't be
re-assigned
>
>Erdal
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065131 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 00:20 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 23:00:46 +0100, James Farrar
<james.s.farrar [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the judge and say Milan are
>reprieved because of the problems of working out who to add to Serie A
>for 06/07 if four clubs are relegated.
No, Milan were "reprieved" (if you call a 59 point penalization a
reprieve...) because the prosecuter could not find any direct club
involvment in attempts to have linesmen assigned.
Juve, Fiornetina and Lazio had company presidents,and officials caught
on the phone asking for referees to be assigned and did so repeatedly,
and where thus accused of direct and continued involvement, whereas
Milan had a low level manager talk to the linesmen official on one
occasion for one game (which, ironically Milan had a goal dissalowed
for offsides...) , and prosecuter felt there was not sufficient
evidence to accuse them of direct involvement. Only indirect.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065132 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 00:23 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065159 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 01:50 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 23:23:07 +0100, Red Moon <redmoon [at] redmoon.redmoon>
wrote:
>"Erdal Paksoy" <paksoy [at] ti.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Benny" <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> wrote in message news:02lWx+AJz+tEFwGq [at] mail.soccer-europe.com...
>>> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
>>> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
>>> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
>>> Milan - 15 point penalty
>>>
>>
>>I assume all teams are banned from Europe for this year. Is that true?
>>
>>What happens to the Serie A titles from the last couple of years?
>>
>>Erdal
>>
>>
>Maybe they will auction it on ebay to the highest bidder.
Chelsea win the EPL/Serie A double in 2006!
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065176 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 02:22 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065245 ] |
Sat, 15 July 2006 08:42 |
|
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:44:05 -0500, "Erdal Paksoy" <paksoy [at] ti.com>
wrote:
>
>"Benny" <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> wrote in message news:02lWx+AJz+tEFwGq [at] mail.soccer-europe.com...
>> Juventus - relegation to Serie B, 30 point penalty
>> Lazio - relegation to Serie B, 7 point penalty
>> Fiorentina - relegation to Serie B, 12 point penalty
>> Milan - 15 point penalty
>>
>
>I assume all teams are banned from Europe for this year. Is that true?
Not exactly banned: Juve, Lazio and Fiorentina are moved to the last
place and relegated, Milan gets 29 points less (and 15 next year) so
in the new ranking they are out.
There is though a possibility that Milan gains Europe back if Empoli
doesn't accept UEFA because its stadium doesn't have europena
standards (they should be playing in another one, which is quite
possible, Firenze is very close)
>What happens to the Serie A titles from the last couple of years?
FIGC will have to decide. Probably not assigned.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065626 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 14:52 |
|
"Coppernob" <alexnorton [at] despammed.com> wrote in message
news:lq5gb2t6hip6rr4d26nglumb2lin7dmqv3 [at] 4ax.com...
>
> Juve, Fiornetina and Lazio had company presidents,and officials caught
> on the phone asking for referees to be assigned and did so repeatedly,
> and where thus accused of direct and continued involvement, whereas
> Milan had a low level manager talk to the linesmen official on one
> occasion for one game (which, ironically Milan had a goal dissalowed
> for offsides...) , and prosecuter felt there was not sufficient
> evidence to accuse them of direct involvement. Only indirect.
Unfortunately, you are 100% correct. It sucks, and it's a travesty of
justice, unless you truly believe that Galliani didn't know anything of
Meani's actions. But according to the sporting justice code, Milan couldn't
really get more than that. Plus, Milan's penalty will very likely be reduced
by the appeals court.
The only consolation is that the whole world will know that you are a bunch
of cheaters and you got away with a slap on the wrist and the chance to raid
Juve's player pool.
At least the Immaculate Virgins are immaculate.
Daniele
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065638 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 15:15 |
|
"Futbolmetrix" <futbolmetrix [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e9d98l$qu9$1 [at] news.iucc.ac.il...
> "Coppernob" <alexnorton [at] despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:lq5gb2t6hip6rr4d26nglumb2lin7dmqv3 [at] 4ax.com...
> >
> > Juve, Fiornetina and Lazio had company presidents,and officials caught
> > on the phone asking for referees to be assigned and did so repeatedly,
> > and where thus accused of direct and continued involvement, whereas
> > Milan had a low level manager talk to the linesmen official on one
> > occasion for one game (which, ironically Milan had a goal dissalowed
> > for offsides...) , and prosecuter felt there was not sufficient
> > evidence to accuse them of direct involvement. Only indirect.
>
> Unfortunately, you are 100% correct. It sucks, and it's a travesty of
> justice, unless you truly believe that Galliani didn't know anything of
> Meani's actions. But according to the sporting justice code, Milan
couldn't
> really get more than that. Plus, Milan's penalty will very likely be
reduced
> by the appeals court.
>
> The only consolation is that the whole world will know that you are a
bunch
> of cheaters and you got away with a slap on the wrist and the chance to
raid
> Juve's player pool.
There's a BIG difference between what Juve and Milan did.
There are 100's of calls between Moggi and refs that show corruption.
There's only ONE call between a ref and a low level Milan manager that was
presumably corrupt.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065639 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 16:21 |
|
"Diabolik" <diabolik [at] email.it> wrote in message
news:uZqug.5876$tE5.2141 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> There's a BIG difference between what Juve and Milan did.
>
> There are 100's of calls between Moggi and refs that show corruption.
Actually, there is not one single phone call between Moggi or Giraudo and
any referee or linesman. Not one single phone call. Not a single phone call
between Fiorentina or Lazio managers and the referees either. The only
person who called the linesmen directly and gave them instructions on how to
raise their flag was Meani.
Diabolik, we've been saying this on RSS for the past two months. If you've
chosen to ignore everything and wake up just now that Milan was penalized,
it's not our fault.
Daniele
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065641 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 15:43 |
|
"Futbolmetrix" <futbolmetrix [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e9deg5$tn1$1 [at] news.iucc.ac.il...
> "Diabolik" <diabolik [at] email.it> wrote in message
> news:uZqug.5876$tE5.2141 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> > There's a BIG difference between what Juve and Milan did.
> >
> > There are 100's of calls between Moggi and refs that show corruption.
>
> Actually, there is not one single phone call between Moggi or Giraudo and
> any referee or linesman. Not one single phone call. Not a single phone
call
> between Fiorentina or Lazio managers and the referees either. The only
> person who called the linesmen directly and gave them instructions on how
to
> raise their flag was Meani.
>
> Diabolik, we've been saying this on RSS for the past two months. If you've
> chosen to ignore everything and wake up just now that Milan was penalized,
> it's not our fault.
I have accepted it, no problem, but since you know what has been happening,
like I do, don't you think the sentences are harsh, blaming the clubs as
scapegoats, instead of the whole system, and Carraro who allowed it to
happen?
You know what the Italian justice system is like, they have the tall poppy
syndrome.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065646 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 17:34 |
|
"Diabolik" <diabolik [at] email.it> wrote in message
news:aorug.5890$tE5.2390 [at] news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> I have accepted it, no problem, but since you know what has been
> happening,
> like I do, don't you think the sentences are harsh, blaming the clubs as
> scapegoats,
I'm in Serie B with a 30 point penalty, so I should be the first one to
complain about the verdict being too harsh. Given the seriousness of the
accusations, though, the verdict is not too harsh, and I can understand
those who complain about it being too lenient.
Whether there is enough evidence to sustain the accusations is another
matter.
Whether deep down I believe the accusations to be true is a third matter.
> instead of the whole system, and Carraro who allowed it to
> happen?
The one positive thing about this verdict is that Franco "Mr. Armchair"
Carraro has been suspended for 4 and a half years.
Daniele
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065685 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 20:15 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : Futbolmetrix <futbolmetrix [at] yahoo.com>
>Actually, there is not one single phone call between Moggi or Giraudo and
>any referee or linesman. Not one single phone call. Not a single phone call
Why would he need to talk to referees when he had the VP of the referees
commission (Pairetto) and referee designator (Paolo Bergamo) in his back
pocket, as the transcripts clearly show.
>between Fiorentina or Lazio managers and the referees either. The only
>person who called the linesmen directly and gave them instructions on how to
>raise their flag was Meani.
Not with the referees but with the referee designators and the VP of the
FIGC.
>Diabolik, we've been saying this on RSS for the past two months. If you've
>chosen to ignore everything and wake up just now that Milan was penalized,
>it's not our fault.
And some of us have been saying Juve, Lazio and Fiorentina were screwed
when this initially broke while you chose to dismiss the evidence.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065696 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 21:43 |
|
"Benny" <Benny [at] soccer-europe.com> wrote in message
news:UAt+8ABnMouEFwZM [at] mail.soccer-europe.com...
>>Actually, there is not one single phone call between Moggi or Giraudo and
>>any referee or linesman. Not one single phone call. Not a single phone
>>call
>
> Why would he need to talk to referees when he had the VP of the referees
> commission (Pairetto) and referee designator (Paolo Bergamo) in his back
> pocket, as the transcripts clearly show.
I'm not saying that's not the case. But the statement made by Diabolik as to
the existence of hundreds of phone calls between Moggi and referees is
factually incorrect.
>
>>between Fiorentina or Lazio managers and the referees either. The only
>>person who called the linesmen directly and gave them instructions on how
>>to
>>raise their flag was Meani.
>
> Not with the referees but with the referee designators and the VP of the
> FIGC.
>
The Fiorentina bosses had frequent conversations with Innocenzo Mazzini (VP
of the FIGC), in which they exerted pressure on him to speak with the
referee designators and to help Fiorentina.
Lazio president had frequent conversations with the Franco Carraro, head of
the FIGC, and asked him to speak with the referee designators and help
Lazio.
Meani spoke directly with the linesmen (as well as with the designator of
linesmen), and gave them specific instructions on how to raise or not raise
the flag when Milan attacked and when Milan defended.
Just so that everybody knows the facts.
>>Diabolik, we've been saying this on RSS for the past two months. If you've
>>chosen to ignore everything and wake up just now that Milan was penalized,
>>it's not our fault.
>
> And some of us have been saying Juve, Lazio and Fiorentina were screwed
> when this initially broke while you chose to dismiss the evidence.
If anybody was dismissing the evidence, and sticking his head under the
sand, that was you.
I pointed out that there was no direct evidence that Juve tried to alter the
results of any specific match. It turned out that I was 100% correct, and
Juve was not found guilty of attempting to alter the result of any specific
match. It was only the "plurality of Moggi's actions" that led the judges to
conclude that Juve tried to alter the development of the whole championship
(without however altering the result of any specific match. Interesting,
no?).
If Juve had chosen a more aggressive defense strategy, it is not
inconceivable that they could have come out completely "clean". On the other
hand, that could have also meant Serie C, and the soft defense line was
rewarded.
Daniele
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1065710 ] |
Sun, 16 July 2006 21:29 |
|
> Subject : Calciopoli Verdicts
> From : Futbolmetrix <futbolmetrix [at] yahoo.com>
>If anybody was dismissing the evidence, and sticking his head under the
>sand, that was you.
Once it emerged Galliani was involved were also screwed, this only came
to light weeks after the story broke.
http://soccer-europe.com
Rss feed : http://soccer-europe.com/RSS/News.xml
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1087442 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 18:26 |
|
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 14:52:03 +0200, "Futbolmetrix"
<futbolmetrix [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Unfortunately, you are 100% correct. It sucks, and it's a travesty of
>justice, unless you truly believe that Galliani didn't know anything of
>Meani's actions.
My thoughts are that Galliani knew exactly what Meani was doing, but
that Milan's medling in footbal weas more on the financial side than
the "footbal" side, in other words that, unlike Juventus, Fiore, Lazio
(and all the others (no club is a virgin) Galliani was more interested
in playing political and financial puppetmaster, whereas Moggi and
Giraudo liked to play footbal market masters.
Juve got what they deserved for years of coercion, arm twisting, GEA ,
Siena, Catania conivance. A couple of years in Juve will do you good -
it did us...
What makes me laugh is Inter parading verginal status when they they
admit having fabbricated passports for their own players, when they
are caught going to dinner with the same Bergamo that has Moggi in hot
water.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1087444 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 18:26 |
|
In article <lzd5c799za.fsf [at] null.nullsome.net>,
Rolleston <Nemo [at] nullsome.net> wrote:
> > Yes, that's why they're not in the Champions League.
>
> This is bad for the Champions' League. I do want to see corruption punished,
> but I don't want the CL weakened like this.
The champions league is so lucrative that kicking them out of the C.L.
is a major financial penalty.
|
|
|
| Re: Calciopoli Verdicts [message #1087496 ] |
Mon, 17 July 2006 21:51 |
|
Coppernob ha scritto:
>
> What makes me laugh is Inter parading verginal status when they they
> admit having fabbricated passports for their own players, when they
> are caught going to dinner with the same Bergamo that has Moggi in hot
> water.
What about Dida,Bartelt,Veron passports? Recoba has been condamned and
he has pais his debt with justice.
|
|
|
