Search results

I would take A minus 30 in a heartbeat

If this is indeed the sentence, we should be able to appeal our way back up to A

Not yet

The have left the chambers and are on the way to read the sentence.

It was a joke...we're both from California sheesh

:D

I think the longer the wait, the better our chances, actually.

Ahhhh, OK. :)

Cursed 29 times, then ;)

Yup. Again see Scandal, Doping: Outcome EDIT: Put another way...if you can't convinct a doctor/club who was injecting players, how the heck can you convict a president/club for suggesting fixing a match?

You may be right, of course, amico mio... I think Moggi was smarter than that, though.:eyebrows:

Oh, I'm not saying that that didn't happen... I'm saying that they can not prove that that happened. ;) BFD:)

Underlining mine Direct=bribing officials Indirect=asking officials All the evidence says indirect.

But Juve offered nothing. Look, I am not naive. Obviously, it appears, Moggi asked the refs to fix matches, but the cases are different. No one was bribed. He asked. They could have (obviously should have) said no. He is certainly guilty of trying to influence refs (if the evidence is true)...

I don't know, TBH. Either way, the cases are much different. Nowhere has it been proved that Moggi gave the refs money (at least to my knowledge). You could argue that: 1. what he did, while unsporting possibly, was not clearly illegal (he asked for specific refs to be assigned....he could...

Not sure.. Milan was relegated because it was proven they fixed matches by bribing the refs

What I would really be interested in, was what evidence they used when Milan was relegated.

I had forgotten about that. Thanks for the clarification, amico mio. :)

I think so, as well, amico mio. :)

I believe so. Another point: the prosecution had to come out with something "big" or lose face after having spent all the time and money they did on this case. They would look like idiots. Again, we'll see.