Board & Management (50 Viewers)
- Thread starter .zero
- Start date
they removed it though. guy's right, juventus must start defending itself
Sandulli on the penalty to Juve:
➡️Piero Sandulli, why didn't the revision of the judgment on the plusvalenze case surprise you?
"Because for some time now, like many other colleagues, I support that publicly traded companies should be treated differently to sporting companies."
"And it's the current case of Juventus, once again, as it is being shown."
➡️In what sense?
"In the sense that first the revision and then the sentence were based on elements that came out from the investigation conducted by the CONSOB, who by definition can naturally oversee clubs that are listed in the Stock Exchange."
"In this respect, in all sincerity, I expected more to be done on this topic."
➡️Meaning?
"I hoped that the recent sport reform would have addressed this topic, which at the moment remains a weak point in the system. From there comes the penalty against Juventus and the non-sanction against the other involved clubs
➡️ But wouldn't this create a judicial disparity in the sporting system?
"I do not see it as a disparity, but a different treatment based on the different past choices."
"In fact this condition is accepted by the club when it decides to enter the Stock Exchange."
"And that's why the current sentence is applied based on the Consob investigation, which brought new facts with respect to the ones published last April, when Juventus was acquitted.
➡️ Did you get an idea on the technical defects highlighted by the bianconeri lawyers and that will be presented to the College of Sports Warranty of CONI?
"Now we are going into technicalities, on which I have no way to express myself.
"At best it is remarkable job done by the judge that there isn't a single line on the quantification of the penalty points request and different dimensions adopted by the Court."
➡️ Shouldn't the followed principle in every case be based on affectivity?
"Whenever possible yes, otherwise the sanction is postponed to the successive season.
"In this case, the penalty was applied to the current standing at the moment, although it is not certain that it will become definitive by the end of the lleague.
On this subject: a penalty handed down during an ongoing season, upon which other degrees of judgement are still pending, wouldn't it risk creating an embarrassing situation as suggested by De Siervo a few days ago?
- - - Updated - - -
Literally kangaroo court judiciary aren't there are other teams in Europe like Man utd on the stock exchange do the Fa treat them differently to other clubs not on the stock exchange.
➡️Piero Sandulli, why didn't the revision of the judgment on the plusvalenze case surprise you?
"Because for some time now, like many other colleagues, I support that publicly traded companies should be treated differently to sporting companies."
"And it's the current case of Juventus, once again, as it is being shown."
➡️In what sense?
"In the sense that first the revision and then the sentence were based on elements that came out from the investigation conducted by the CONSOB, who by definition can naturally oversee clubs that are listed in the Stock Exchange."
"In this respect, in all sincerity, I expected more to be done on this topic."
➡️Meaning?
"I hoped that the recent sport reform would have addressed this topic, which at the moment remains a weak point in the system. From there comes the penalty against Juventus and the non-sanction against the other involved clubs
➡️ But wouldn't this create a judicial disparity in the sporting system?
"I do not see it as a disparity, but a different treatment based on the different past choices."
"In fact this condition is accepted by the club when it decides to enter the Stock Exchange."
"And that's why the current sentence is applied based on the Consob investigation, which brought new facts with respect to the ones published last April, when Juventus was acquitted.
➡️ Did you get an idea on the technical defects highlighted by the bianconeri lawyers and that will be presented to the College of Sports Warranty of CONI?
"Now we are going into technicalities, on which I have no way to express myself.
"At best it is remarkable job done by the judge that there isn't a single line on the quantification of the penalty points request and different dimensions adopted by the Court."
➡️ Shouldn't the followed principle in every case be based on affectivity?
"Whenever possible yes, otherwise the sanction is postponed to the successive season.
"In this case, the penalty was applied to the current standing at the moment, although it is not certain that it will become definitive by the end of the lleague.
On this subject: a penalty handed down during an ongoing season, upon which other degrees of judgement are still pending, wouldn't it risk creating an embarrassing situation as suggested by De Siervo a few days ago?
- - - Updated - - -
Literally kangaroo court judiciary aren't there are other teams in Europe like Man utd on the stock exchange do the Fa treat them differently to other clubs not on the stock exchange.
Last edited:
