Calciopoli II

San Siro · Apr 17, 2010

Gazebo said:
when I read the sentence other teams were penalised, I spit blood: the points deduction of AcMilan was calculated in a way that it would not be able to participate to the champions league. But then we discover that Empoli did not subscribe itself to the UEFA champions league in time, meaning it had no right to participate. So yes, here is ac Milan again.
If the FIGC had balls, it would have denied ac Milan's access regardless.

no.

the points deduction of milan was calculated based on Lazio's position, another point deduction and lazio would have been relegated, which they didn't wan to do.

the rest of your post makes no sense at all, what the fuck has empoli got to do with this?

Gazebo said:
one thing first:
in this particular situation we, as Juve fans, have not so much to loose anymore.
We lost two titles, two years (at least) of participating to european football, many valuable players and of course "we lost our virginity" towards the serie B.
Bottom line: Juventus was punished. For some people too much, for others not enough.

However, Moggi is risking to go to jail: so of course he is defending himself with the best (or nastiest?) methods he has.
The line of defence is pretty obvious: to show the jury that everybody was trying to take advantage - or protect its team from the others. That he did not control or have a system.

Will he succeed? I have no idea. However, my opinion is that the verdict will be of some kind of accusation, because in case he gets cleared out (prosciolto) , it will be a very embarassing situation for the FIGC and for the Naples prosecution, and Juve will have the right to claim something back.
This somehow should have answered your question.

you seem very confused; so let me try to clear your head a bit

- juve have paid. yes. of course. but it's the same juve that benefited from moggi's methods for over a decade. juve was not a third party in all this, juve was AT THE CENTRE of the system, so of course they paid.

- the trial in napoli. THIS IS WHERE YOU SEEM EXTREMELY CONFUSED.
the trial in napoli is a criminal trial, not a sporting one. KEEP THE TWO THINGS SEPERATE. they have completely different dynamics and are NOT interlinked.

if you touch the ball with your hand on a football pitch you get punished, if you touch the ball with your hand in your backyard while playing with your mates you will not get punished. DON'T MIX CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS WITH SPORTING ONES.

you say you don't know if moggi will be found guilty in the napoli trial, let me tell you something; moggi will almost certainly be cleared for the crime he is accused of. and guess what? this will NOT change or modify in any way his position in the sporting trial WHERE HE WAS FOUND GUILTY.

juve did wrong, got found out, where accused, confessed, got punished.

thats calciopoli in one sentence.

your scudetto's are 27. twenty-seven.

Gazebo · Apr 17, 2010

San Siro said:
no.

the points deduction of milan was calculated based on Lazio's position, another point deduction and lazio would have been relegated, which they didn't wan to do.

the rest of your post makes no sense at all, what the fuck has empoli got to do with this?

ok, I admit:
Empoli has nothing to do with this, my mistake. I thought I remembered, but that isn't the case.

The thing of Empoli was that - even if ac Milan would have kept the initial punishment - they would not go to the uefa cup because they did not send their application in time to the uefa.

San Siro said:
you seem very confused; so let me try to clear your head a bit

- juve have paid. yes. of course. but it's the same juve that benefited from moggi's methods for over a decade. juve was not a third party in all this, juve was AT THE CENTRE of the system, so of course they paid.

- the trial in napoli. THIS IS WHERE YOU SEEM EXTREMELY CONFUSED.
the trial in napoli is a criminal trial, not a sporting one. KEEP THE TWO THINGS SEPERATE. they have completely different dynamics and are NOT interlinked.

if you touch the ball with your hand on a football pitch you get punished, if you touch the ball with your hand in your backyard while playing with your mates you will not get punished. DON'T MIX CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS WITH SPORTING ONES.

you say you don't know if moggi will be found guilty in the napoli trial, let me tell you something; moggi will almost certainly be cleared for the crime he is accused of. and guess what? this will NOT change or modify in any way his position in the sporting trial WHERE HE WAS FOUND GUILTY.

juve did wrong, got found out, where accused, confessed, got punished.

thats calciopoli in one sentence.

your scudetto's are 27. twenty-seven.

I am well aware of the difference between the criminal and sporting trial.
And - I am very sorry to disappoint you - yes, they CAN be interlinked.
If you have any doubts, go and check what happened to Guardiola in 2001, when still a player at Brescia. He had a four month ban because of alledged doping. This was the sporting sentence.
Then, during the criminal trial (which in fact did take place), he was released from all the accusations. As result of such, also his sporting trial related ban was cancelled by the sporting authorities.

Because yes, there is an article in the sports justice that gives the possibility to change sentences issued in the past (article nr 39, keep that good in mind).
Next time, also double check your information before trying to lecture someone, ok???????

Luka · Apr 18, 2010

Gazebo said:
I think I did find something. It is in Italian though.
The source is definitely not from a Juve-based website
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/07/dirette/sezioni/calcio/mondiali/procesluned/

check the update at 20.23

So, not only Juventus, but the same applied for Lazio, Fiorentina and Milan, and Bergamo + Others.

It is a CAF for one so the appeal court, not the first trial, and from my limited italian, I think it is said, the judge denied the deffense request to include testimonies of the witnesses (those witnesses were basicly the guilty people).

There is no mention of deffense not being able to use what you said. And this is what you've said:

"During the sports trial, Moggi and Giraudo's defence were not allowed to use the tapes of the incriminated football matches to prove that most of the theories were bullshit"

Gazebo said:
Because yes, there is an article in the sports justice that gives the possibility to change sentences issued in the past (article nr 39, keep that good in mind).

That is true. I've read about it somewhere.

I also agree those cases are linked together. After all, Moggi is trialed for sporting fraud, and this is exactly the same thing he was trialed for in the sporting trial (just with different way of punishment).

...

I have another episode of "Don't believe this idiot", for our kind JuBe guests about their Hero (gsol) from juBe boards

In fact I might do the spineoff later on called "Don't believe this stubborn moron" :lol:

"Don't believe this idiot" round 7. Ding... :lol:

ps. Spitting on someone is not violation of article 6, as it is not something done to gain advantage of the team in the standings.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
Juventus benefitted from referees in the standings...but no game was fixed
Juventus benefitted from referees in the standings...but no yellow card scheme existed
Juventus benefitted from referees in the standings...but no referee selection process was compromised
Juventus benefitted from referees in the standings...but the season was legitimate!

The_Destroyer said:
page 109

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
I feel for you. You just boarded a sinking ship. You claimed that the verdict confirmed everything and now you'll have to show me where.

The_Destroyer said:
page 109 :howler: and again I did not write that the verdict confirmed everything. I wrote that if Juventus were relegated the official documents could just confirm the reason why Juventus were relegated. Learn to quote or do not quote at all.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
I read it, so did the judges that wrote it, so did many before you. If in two years no one has managed to surface one fixed game I say good luck to you.

The_Destroyer said:
Infact if you had read the documents you gave a link to, you would have found that Juventus were not punished for match fixing. READ THEM! page 109!

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
and if you follow the trial you’d know that evidence tampering is a massive part of it. The truth is that the “secretary” got the ball rolling but now many higher ranking managers have begun speaking and naming names. Even Cipriani gave an interview I have in mp3 that describes what is happening. Evidence was tampered and Cipriani, Platea, Ghioni, Tavarolli have agreed to co-operate with authorities as a result. Why do you think upper management at Telecom have disbanded and fled?

The_Destroyer said:
you are escaping the "matter which matters". Were the tapewires on Juventus a fake? If they were not a fake, the content is what matters for this debate. Unless we are debating the privacy instead of Juventus!

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
The Totti spitting comparison is spot on. It was the exact same violation. Unsportsmanlike conduct. Sure the actions were different but the violation was identical.

The_Destroyer said:
It's spot on in your brain. Totti did not violate the article 6, he did not commit an illicit act.

Gazebo · Apr 18, 2010

Luka said:
It is a CAF for one so the appeal court, not the first trial, and from my limited italian, I think it is said, the judge denied the deffense request to include testimonies of the witnesses (those witnesses were basicly the guilty people).

There is no mention of deffense not being able to use what you said. And this is what you've said:

"During the sports trial, Moggi and Giraudo's defence were not allowed to use the tapes of the incriminated football matches to prove that most of the theories were bullshit"

Good morning Luka
if you think about it, the debate shouldn't really be about what I said or not: obviously it is not my intention to mis-inform you or anybody else in this forum, because sooner or later the truth comes out, and what I say, will never be of influence to the Napoli trial. After all, I am just a "guest" user in a forum. I have my sources of information (some available, some I have to look for) and - let's say it - my ways of interpretation , as you also have.
So, going back to what I said: at a certain stage (CAF, appeal) Moggi & co were not able to use their video material and witnesses (guilty or not).
I am checking if Moggi Pairetto etc were allowed to defend each other with the above mentioned material also in earlier stages. It does however puzzle me - and this is a personal opinion - that during an APPEAL the accused can not call witnesses to defend him/herself.

Luka · Apr 18, 2010

Gazebo said:
Good morning Luka

Morning.

So, going back to what I said: at a certain stage (CAF, appeal) Moggi & co were not able to use their video material and witnesses (guilty or not).
I am checking if Moggi Pairetto etc were allowed to defend each other with the above mentioned material also in earlier stages. It does however puzzle me - and this is a personal opinion - that during an APPEAL the accused can not call witnesses to defend him/herself.

I never was particulary interested in that, as it is (to me simply not possible) that the defendants couldn't deffend themselves. This is not ZSSR under Stalin, where they trialed people without any deffense.

And if you notice in the paragraph you directed me too, the head of commision declined those evidences as IRRELEVANT to the case, and I think every judge or head of commision has a right to define the evidence relevant or not. Just because he declined THIS particular piece of evidence, doesn't mean he declined them a proper deffense.

The_Egyptian_Interista · Apr 18, 2010

This seems important. A translation would be nice.

http://www.fcinternews.it/?action=read&idnotizia=17537

Gazebo · Apr 18, 2010

Luka said:
Morning.

I never was particulary interested in that, as it is (to me simply not possible) that the defendants couldn't deffend themselves. This is not ZSSR under Stalin, where they trialed people without any deffense.

And if you notice in the paragraph you directed me too, the head of commision declined those evidences as IRRELEVANT to the case, and I think every judge or head of commision has a right to define the evidence relevant or not. Just because he declined THIS particular piece of evidence, doesn't mean he declined them a proper deffense.

all of them Irrelevant? Both video material (which was used for the prosecutors, but cannot be used by the defence?) and witnesess (same as above?).
And, still regarding the video evidence, why didn't the same happen with Arezzo and Reggina. Arezzo was allowed to use the video evidence of the match against Salernitana (one of the suspected games) and consequently got a lower punishment.

But that was the sports trial, not to be confused (San Siro Dixit) with the real trial.

ciao!

vinyl · Apr 18, 2010

The_Egyptian_Interista said:
This seems important. A translation would be nice.

http://www.fcinternews.it/?action=read&idnotizia=17537

Yes.. translation please!!

I used google translation and this is what it said:

New interception announced by Moggi's lawyers to confirm the dinner meeting between the designator and then the Inter president. In fact, a picture emerges which sees Inter victim of machinations,

And the first paragraph:

Another spectacular own goal by the defense of Luciano Moggi (LOL), who in an attempt to put Inter in the middle and especially Giacinto Facchetti, 'guilty' of having called more than once arbitration designator Paolo Bergamo, make public a new conversation confirming The dinner meeting between the two.

Luka · Apr 18, 2010

Gazebo said:
all of them Irrelevant? Both video material (which was used for the prosecutors, but cannot be used by the defence?) and witnesess (same as above?).
And, still regarding the video evidence, why didn't the same happen with Arezzo and Reggina. Arezzo was allowed to use the video evidence of the match against Salernitana (one of the suspected games) and consequently got a lower punishment.

Look, I don't have masters of law, I don't know how it works, and I'm really not much interested in looking into this stuff. I seriously doubt that some proof that was used by prossecution couldn't be used by the deffense as a proof for their line of deffense.

Again I don't know how it works, but I think, that if one side present an evidence, the other have full right to it, to look into it, and appeal to it in their line of questioning, or deffense. For example those 75 tapes that were now presented by Moggi will be used by the prosecutors as well.

So I really, REALLY doubt it is believable, that Moggi and Co couldn't use the same evidences, that prosecutors or magistrates, used to convict people/clubs in Calciopoli trial. I THINK some of the evidences presented (either by prosecutors/deffense) could be not included when judged as irrelevant by the head of the commision, but that's that.

As for those video evidences. I have no idea what to respond to that. We would have to look into the circumstances, and look closely into the case, why the commision allowed some pieces to be included as evidence, while others were not allowed.

You again go into it, as some kind of a conspiracy, and I don't buy it, sorry. I never did.

Gazebo · Apr 18, 2010

Luka said:
Look, I don't have masters of law, I don't know how it works, and I'm really not much interested in looking into this stuff. I seriously doubt that some proof that was used by prossecution couldn't be used by the deffense as a proof for their line of deffense.

Again I don't know how it works, but I think, that if one side present an evidence, the other have full right to it, to look into it, and appeal to it in their line of questioning, or deffense. For example those 75 tapes that were now presented by Moggi will be used by the prosecutors as well.

So I really, REALLY doubt it is believable, that Moggi and Co couldn't use the same evidences, that prosecutors or magistrates, used to convict people/clubs in Calciopoli trial. I THINK some of the evidences presented (either by prosecutors/deffense) could be not included when judged as irrelevant by the head of the commision, but that's that.

As for those video evidences. I have no idea what to respond to that. We would have to look into the circumstances, and look closely into the case, why the commision allowed some pieces to be included as evidence, while others were not allowed.

You again go into it, as some kind of a conspiracy, and I don't buy it, sorry. I never did.

that's why I always considered the sports trial a muppet show, and that is also why I am happy not to live in Italy anymore. But this is my opinion.

delaurentis · Apr 18, 2010

Ah so the sportstrial influences your live ?? So the whole purpose of your live revolves around Sports-trials ?? You can always go and live in the North or Southpole.. There will be nomore sports-trials that can bother you. Deal ??

Gazebo · Apr 18, 2010

delaurentis said:
Ah so the sportstrial influences your live ?? So the whole purpose of your live revolves around Sports-trials ?? You can always go and live in the North or Southpole.. There will be nomore sports-trials that can bother you. Deal ??

thank you very much for your tip. But for now living outside Italy will do it.

What I am saying is that the sports trial is just a good example on how things (don't) work in the belpaese. But we're going off-topic here.
Thanks again for the tip.

By the way, just noticed your location. we're neighbours

Luka · Apr 20, 2010

Episode 8 of "Don't believe this idiot", about the juBe fans Hero (gsol) from juBe boards

"Don't believe this idiot" round 8. Ding... :lol:

ps. More idiocy to follow

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
...you are lost. If you actually think that La Stampa is defending Juve because of the Agnellis then not only do you not understand the press (who is credible and who isn’t) but you also haven’t understood where the current Agnellis sit when it comes to the scandal. The Agnelli brothers adored the triad but the new management had been at odds with them for years (since the death of the brothers). Are you implying that La Stampa is publishing propaganda to support Moggi and that the Elkanns are behind it? Moggi and the Elkanns are anything but friends and if you look carefully you’ll see that the new Juve management has several ties to Moggi enemies. Start by looking at the fact that now Grande Stevens sits on the RCS board, look at the fact that Montezemolo and Tronchetti sit as President and Vice President of Confindustria along with Massimo Moratti’s brother. How about the fact that FIAT hired Guido Rossi as their new consultant. If the current Agnellis were influencing La Stampa it wouldn’t be to defend Moggi or condemn Calciopoli. In any case that wouldn’t explain the numerous posts I have referring to La Repubblica.

The_Destroyer said:
You have a bad habit to imply what I don't imply. I was simply telling you a fact you ignored: LaStampa is controlled by the family Agnelli so it is not independent as you wrongly stated. They will follow the wind according to the interest of the family Agnelli whether it is pro or against Moggi.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
This is for those who are attempting to proclaim Telecom's legitimacy as an evidence provider. Much of it is not specific to Calciopoli since they have plenty of trials going on however I already posted articles that linked the two. Here you will see what the "Tiger Team" was up to and who was behind it. You'll see evidence tampering (evidence destroying) references and beyond. Just think, much is still under raps because the trial is ongoing and still all this comes out. Just wait until the trial concludes.

The_Destroyer said:
who is proclaiming Telecom's legitimacy as an evidence provider? But let me ask you a thing: if you found out that your wife has a lover would it make any difference to you whether it's the Telecom or someone else to give you the tapewires which prove the betrayal?

You are collecting a bunch of material of no interest (about Telecom) while you are escasping the "matter which matters", just after telling me in your first post that Moggi & Co.'s faults are comparable to the spit of Totti.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
La Stampa is operating independently and the proof of that is that they are being honest when it comes to the Telecom scandal and Calciopoli. Had they been serving the Elkanns they would have either said nothing or said the opposite of what they are saying now. Like some other papers. Amazingly their reports are strikingly similar to the Repubblica.

The_Destroyer said:
:howler: They are indepent cause it serves your purpose.... but they are not!

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
If my wife was overheard on the phone and the wires came from people being tried right now for manipulating evidence (among other things) I’d believe my wife…especially if the calls resulted in nothing concrete. You really should listen to the calls before forming opinions

The_Destroyer said:
I listened and read them all, they could not be manipulated and indeed just a blind or biased person could think that everything is ok after reading/listening to them.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
"1. Il compimento, con qualsiasi mezzo, di atti diretti ad alterare lo svolgimento o il risultato di una gara ovvero ad assicurare a chiunque un vantaggio in classifica, costituisce illecito sportivo.

and at page 109 there is written exactly what is bolded"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

THAT'S YOUR BIG ARGUMENT. I was wondering where the hell you were going with page 109 and that's it. The definition of Article 6?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The_Destroyer said:
at page 109 there are the motivations of the virdict but of course you ignore it. And the virdict is a strict application of the article 6, so there are no multiples of articles 1 which make an article 6, the way you stated... ass.

juBe_expert_vel_gsol said:
You have COMPLETELY missed the point. The reason that verdict was posted is to present precisely what you found. You are just missing the first component.
Yes they were relegated for 1 Article 6 violation but how did they get to that violation?
What game was fixed? What ref was bribed? What was the actual act?That entire verdict goes throw every accusation and dismantles it. It clearly states that the referee selection process was not compromised. It states that the referees did not alter matches. It states that the season’s results were legitimate. It says there was no yellow card system. Then it convicts Juventus for 1 article 6 violation…WHAT VIOLATION? The hundred or so pages preceding said the exact opposite! Did you miss that?

The_Destroyer said:
you are a retard or what? Maybe you can't read Italian... the article 6 doesn't necessarily imply match fixing and referees bribing, is it clear?

Please, write on your own, the way you can, the article 6. I posted it, but clearly you either prefer to ignore it or simply can't translate it.

Intermilano90 · Apr 20, 2010

Seems like the trial got postponed due to Ancelotti and Mancini failing to show up because of the Icelandic volcano ashes.

Universe · Apr 20, 2010

lmao. Thanks for posting all those gsol vs Destroyer posts.

gsol's stupidity makes me lose faith in the human race.

"Which match did Juve fix?!?!"

Handoyo · Apr 21, 2010

HAHAHA wtf, where did you ge tthe super awesome smilie!?

Universe · Apr 21, 2010

Made it? lol. made a larger gif on photoshop.

Intermilano90 · Apr 21, 2010

The Italian FA have officially opened a new Calciopoli investigation.

http://www.goal.com/en/news/10/ital...-italian-fa-open-new-calciopoli-investigation

I don't feel good about this. I smell trouble.

Luka · Apr 21, 2010

No worries.

It actually made sense. If they didn't open it, they would be forever dragged by it. If they open it, and conclude nothing new comes out of this, they will be able to say: "Hey we looked into it, but nothing incriminating was found."

Besnik · Apr 21, 2010

Luka said:
No worries.

It actually made sense. If they didn't open it, they would be forever dragged by it. If they open it, and conclude nothing new comes out of this, they will be able to say: "Hey we looked into it, but nothing incriminating was found."

Well said Luka.

This discussion can be done for ever. And Thank you the great informations about this Calciopoli stuff, I have a little knowledge about it, so I'm a bit scared of that.

Calciopoli II

Primavera

Primavera

La Grande Inter

Primavera

La Grande Inter

Primavera

Primavera

Primavera

La Grande Inter

Primavera

Capitano

Primavera

La Grande Inter

Capitano

Moderator

Administrator

Moderator

Capitano

La Grande Inter

La Grande Inter