Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: »UEFA CHAMPIONS LEAGUE
Inter au jucat la pariuri repriza 2-a alta echipa ... iám injurat de la primu pana la ultimu ... de nerecunoscut
Cu Pulisic nu ai nimerit o.
L au luat de la Dortmund pe 64 mln Euro :)
L au luat de la Dortmund pe 64 mln Euro :)
Asa este, dar e tanar. Imi place ca se bazeaza pe tineri si multi vin din propria academie. Vad ca si Mutd incepe sa mearga pe aceeasi cale, sa vedem cata rabdare au patronii.
Mda, eu iarasi ma bucur ca au reusit sa intoarca scorul, mai ales dupa ratarea lui Gotze, Sancho si Hazard in prelungirile primei reprize. Imi aminteste de BvB-ul lui Klopp. Urat i-a criticat Conte pe jucatori si conducere dupa meci...
au condus la barca cu 1-0 si au jucat prima repriza ..la dormund 2-0 jucand .. dar ...cand a venit repriza 2-a parca erau altii ...nu cred ca pot duce ce vrea conte sau nu stiu chiar nu imi dau seama ...daca nu pot duce atunci e greseala antrenorului ca nu stie cat poate echipa lui nu? ...daca ii omori prima repriza ..a 2-a nu erau in stare sa dea o pasa de 5-8 metri ..dadeau numai la borusia ..sau poate gresesc eu
Citeam azi ce spunea Conte, sincer m-am asteptat la mai mult de la el. Zicea ca doar Godin a castigat ceva, restul nimic, ce sa ceara de la unul care a venit de la Cagliari si altul de la Sassuolo. Mi s-a parut o forumlare tare nefericita. Plus ca jucatorii astia ar trebui sa fie mai usor de motivati, tocmai ca nu au castigat nimic. M-am asteptat ca Napoli sa rupa sezonul asta, joaca praf. De Juve nu mai zic, nicio diferenta fata de cum jucau sub Allegri. Inter echipa de o repriza. Atalanta dezastru. Slabuti italienii din pacate.
+1 la ce ai spus despre Conte. Le-a dat in cap la jucatori... Din pacate in Italia inca domneste mafia pe nume Juventus. Nici nu ne putem imagina cata mizerie se intampla inca in Serie A.
Bun, credeam ca avem o discutie constructiva, iar incepem. Voi sunteti genul care vede ceva la televizor si o ia ca pe o mantra, o repeta zi de zi, poate devine adevarat. Cititi va rog despre Calciopoli
The “Calciopoli” sporting fraud scandal of 2006 and its aftermath has wounded the reputation of Italian football around the world and arguably been a leading cause of the weakening of both Serie A and the Azzurri. But little is known about the specifics of the case outside of Italy.
The case in various forms has dragged on for over eight years, new evidence has come to light and new facts revealed. And on Monday, March 23, the Cassazione (Italian Supreme Court) made its final ruling on the case. But what was the case, this convoluted story that engulfed Italian football for nearly a decade?
A dramatic scandal
Calciopoli is casually referred to by most English-speaking observers as a “match-fixing scandal”, despite the fact that match-fixing itself, defined as the pre-determining of results of individual games, was never among even the original accusations leveled in 2006. The point of contention was the belief that Juventus sporting director Luciano Moggi communicated in an “exclusive” fashion with the referee designators of Serie A, attempting to influence results by picking certain referees he considered more favorable to Juventus or more likely to err in favor of Juve on a dubious call. Other accusations piled up and painted a picture of a vast and shadowy network of untraceable phone cards, secret bribes and Mafia-like offers no referee could refuse, down to Byzantine suppositions of calculated distribution of yellow cards throughout the season to ensure top players of rival clubs would be suspended when their teams faced Juve, and the evergreen urban legend that Moggi once locked a misbehaving referee in a bathroom.
Then and now
The original case, in 2006, was rushed through the FIGC’s court of sporting justice in order to close the proceedings in time for the World Cup and avoid sanctions from FIFA. Juventus, in fact, did not appeal the guilty verdict they were slapped with, as to have an ongoing open investigation within their league would have meant Italy being banned from competing in the World Cup that summer, a tournament that the Azzurri eventually won. Juventus were found guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct, stripped of two league titles deemed illegitimate, and relegated to Serie B with a points deduction, and as a result many of their top players including Fabio Cannavaro and Zlatan Ibrahimovic left the club to pursue their successful careers elsewhere. Juve returned to Serie A within a season and have since returned to their winning ways, but the accusations and punishments of Calciopoli remain an open wound, not only in Italy but also abroad, where the stigma has made Juventus known more often than not simply as “that team that cheats.”
Since 2011 however, when the case was appealed and taken to the civil court, much new evidence has come to light. In the words of Italian journalist Guido Vaciago, writing earlier this year for Turin sports daily Tuttosport, the case against Juventus from 2006 has “already disintegrated” and “not one of the accusations still has any legs.”
Evidence admitted, evidence ignored
The main substance of the case was the supposed “exclusive relationship” between Juventus’ sporting director Luciano Moggi and the referee designators of Serie A. Communication between the clubs and the referee’s association was not against the rules at the time; on the contrary it was encouraged as a way to promote openness and transparency. AC Milan even had an employee on staff whose job was communication and relations with the referee’s association. The problem, from which the entire case was built, was the supposed exclusivity of the communication between Moggi and the designators. It was theorized that Moggi was the puppet-master of a vast conspiracy, pulling every possible string and greasing every possible palm, running Serie A itself from his lair and watching the illicit victories roll in.
In the original 2006 trial, a large number of transcripts of wiretapped phone conversations between Moggi and the referee designators Bergamo and Pairetto, in which he requested certain referees be assigned to certain Juventus matches, were admitted as evidence and used to support the accusation of an exclusive relationship. However, as came to light in later years, during the original investigations the Carabinieri had also intercepted thousands of calls made from other clubs, most notably Milan and Inter, to the same designators, and of the same nature. These had not been admitted to the original trial in the court of sporting justice as they were then deemed “irrelevant”, but in fact their very existence – now well documented and accepted – disproves the very nature of the accusation levelled against Moggi.
A mysteriously ineffective conspiracy
Other plots attributed to Moggi’s supposed cabal were the calculated distribution of yellow cards to disqualify important players from facing Juventus, the successful alteration of referee assignments in favor of Juve, and the punishment or reward of referees through illicit channels depending on whether they favored or hindered Juve with their calls.
However, the facts have been shown to back up none of these accusations.
No “Fixed Suspensions.”
Juventus did not receive notably more or less yellow cards that any other team during the seasons in question, but more to the point, where the original case would refer to players disqualified in certain matches, a cursory look at match reports would show that they were in fact on the field and not disqualified. In other instances, where rival players had been disqualified on yellows, they were hardly game-changing key players. In an earlier phase of the trial in Naples, in fact, the judge ruled simply that this conspiracy of yellow cards did not exist and that Juventus had received no advantage from disqualifications.
No “Fixed Referee Assignments”
Other accusations included the successful “fixing” of referee assignments to tip the balance of calls in favor of Juve, but again, the Naples tribunal found no evidence either of Moggi’s interference significantly altering referee assignments or of Juventus receiving any real advantage on points due to referee error or controversial calls. Again, the conspiracy seems mysteriously ineffective.
No “System of Punishment and Reward”
The final part of the alleged plot was a system of reward or punishment to referees based on their dispositions toward Juve – those who favored Juve with their calls would find themselves advancing brilliantly in their careers, while those who hindered them would be subject to all manner of obstacles and suspensions. The tribunal once again found that this was simply not the case – in fact, if there was any connection between a referees advancement and the teams he tended to favor, it was more likely to be those who were lenient or favorable towards Juve who found themselves blocked or with their lives made difficult.
As for the famous story of Moggi locking referee Gianluca Paparesta in the dressing room in Reggio Calabria, the astonishing thing is how many people persist in believing it, considering that Paparesta himself has repeatedly denied that such an event ever took place.
Legitimate victories
All told, the Naples tribunal has already ruled, on the basis of this new evidence, that the 2004-05 season was unaltered by any illicit means, and that the results (and therefore the championship title won by Juventus) were valid and regular. Moggi himself, during the proceedings of the Naples tribunal, was indeed charged with attempted sporting fraud – but the attempts were, it is important to note, found to be completely unsuccessful in altering the results. It is also important to note, as the proceedings in the High Court have found, that Moggi was far from alone in his possible attempts at illicit behavior, and the new evidence indicates similar dubious actions from the directors of Milan and Inter among others. Calciopoli in short was both more widespread and less influential than originally thought, and the original verdict from the FIGC that pointed the finger at Juventus clearly deserves the revision it has been undergoing.
The End and The Beginning
On March 23, the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione), after much-delayed and lengthy deliberations, released their final verdict on the Calciopoli case.
Luciano Moggi was acquitted of conspiracy to commit a crime under the statute of limitations, but also, more significantly, acquitted of two charges of sporting fraud due to lack of evidence. “Il fatto non sussiste”, read the verdict: The facts do not support the accusations.
The findings of the Naples tribunal which declared the 2004-05 season unaltered by any illicit activity were upheld.
A number of referees presumed to be controlled by Moggi’s “cabal” were acquitted entirely.
In effect, the Cassazione has confirmed and solidified the findings of the Naples tribunal, and admitted that much of the case built up that resulted in Juventus being docked points, relegated, and stripped of two titles (to say nothing of their loss in reputation and prestige, and the loss of many of their top players, and the massive financial losses caused by all the aforementioned) was built on little more than hearsay and inference. We have gone from a massive, intricate, dark web of intrigue and conspiracy strangling the entirety of the league – to one man, perhaps, attempting to pull a few strings. Luciano Moggi, most likely, is no saint. But neither, it appears, was he ever the puppet-master of a powerful cabal of corruption as we were led to believe in 2006.
This chapter of the ongoing story that is Calciopoli is finally closed, and it is the findings that have gone a long way towards clearing Juventus’ name which remain. Following this, in light of the new knowledge surrounding the proceedings of the case, Juventus are expected to sue the FIGC for mistrial in the court of sporting justice, and open a new case aimed at gaining financial compensation for their projected revenue lost over the past nine years. They will also attempt to regain their two revoked Scudetti. One very long story has ended and another will soon begin, but for Juventus, the corner has been turned.
Inteleg ca e mai simplu sa dati vina pe maffie, ce comod e sa spui "au castigat ca au inselat". Si de aici incolo, toata lumea isi va explica incompetenta prin asta. Nu sunt adeptul teoriei conspirationiste, dar daca exista acea maffie, inseamna ca sunt mai multi implicati. Totusi important ar fi sa urmaresti faptele, gen tribunal si curte suprema, nu tabloidele.
The “Calciopoli” sporting fraud scandal of 2006 and its aftermath has wounded the reputation of Italian football around the world and arguably been a leading cause of the weakening of both Serie A and the Azzurri. But little is known about the specifics of the case outside of Italy.
The case in various forms has dragged on for over eight years, new evidence has come to light and new facts revealed. And on Monday, March 23, the Cassazione (Italian Supreme Court) made its final ruling on the case. But what was the case, this convoluted story that engulfed Italian football for nearly a decade?
A dramatic scandal
Calciopoli is casually referred to by most English-speaking observers as a “match-fixing scandal”, despite the fact that match-fixing itself, defined as the pre-determining of results of individual games, was never among even the original accusations leveled in 2006. The point of contention was the belief that Juventus sporting director Luciano Moggi communicated in an “exclusive” fashion with the referee designators of Serie A, attempting to influence results by picking certain referees he considered more favorable to Juventus or more likely to err in favor of Juve on a dubious call. Other accusations piled up and painted a picture of a vast and shadowy network of untraceable phone cards, secret bribes and Mafia-like offers no referee could refuse, down to Byzantine suppositions of calculated distribution of yellow cards throughout the season to ensure top players of rival clubs would be suspended when their teams faced Juve, and the evergreen urban legend that Moggi once locked a misbehaving referee in a bathroom.
Then and now
The original case, in 2006, was rushed through the FIGC’s court of sporting justice in order to close the proceedings in time for the World Cup and avoid sanctions from FIFA. Juventus, in fact, did not appeal the guilty verdict they were slapped with, as to have an ongoing open investigation within their league would have meant Italy being banned from competing in the World Cup that summer, a tournament that the Azzurri eventually won. Juventus were found guilty of unsportsmanlike conduct, stripped of two league titles deemed illegitimate, and relegated to Serie B with a points deduction, and as a result many of their top players including Fabio Cannavaro and Zlatan Ibrahimovic left the club to pursue their successful careers elsewhere. Juve returned to Serie A within a season and have since returned to their winning ways, but the accusations and punishments of Calciopoli remain an open wound, not only in Italy but also abroad, where the stigma has made Juventus known more often than not simply as “that team that cheats.”
Since 2011 however, when the case was appealed and taken to the civil court, much new evidence has come to light. In the words of Italian journalist Guido Vaciago, writing earlier this year for Turin sports daily Tuttosport, the case against Juventus from 2006 has “already disintegrated” and “not one of the accusations still has any legs.”
Evidence admitted, evidence ignored
The main substance of the case was the supposed “exclusive relationship” between Juventus’ sporting director Luciano Moggi and the referee designators of Serie A. Communication between the clubs and the referee’s association was not against the rules at the time; on the contrary it was encouraged as a way to promote openness and transparency. AC Milan even had an employee on staff whose job was communication and relations with the referee’s association. The problem, from which the entire case was built, was the supposed exclusivity of the communication between Moggi and the designators. It was theorized that Moggi was the puppet-master of a vast conspiracy, pulling every possible string and greasing every possible palm, running Serie A itself from his lair and watching the illicit victories roll in.
In the original 2006 trial, a large number of transcripts of wiretapped phone conversations between Moggi and the referee designators Bergamo and Pairetto, in which he requested certain referees be assigned to certain Juventus matches, were admitted as evidence and used to support the accusation of an exclusive relationship. However, as came to light in later years, during the original investigations the Carabinieri had also intercepted thousands of calls made from other clubs, most notably Milan and Inter, to the same designators, and of the same nature. These had not been admitted to the original trial in the court of sporting justice as they were then deemed “irrelevant”, but in fact their very existence – now well documented and accepted – disproves the very nature of the accusation levelled against Moggi.
A mysteriously ineffective conspiracy
Other plots attributed to Moggi’s supposed cabal were the calculated distribution of yellow cards to disqualify important players from facing Juventus, the successful alteration of referee assignments in favor of Juve, and the punishment or reward of referees through illicit channels depending on whether they favored or hindered Juve with their calls.
However, the facts have been shown to back up none of these accusations.
No “Fixed Suspensions.”
Juventus did not receive notably more or less yellow cards that any other team during the seasons in question, but more to the point, where the original case would refer to players disqualified in certain matches, a cursory look at match reports would show that they were in fact on the field and not disqualified. In other instances, where rival players had been disqualified on yellows, they were hardly game-changing key players. In an earlier phase of the trial in Naples, in fact, the judge ruled simply that this conspiracy of yellow cards did not exist and that Juventus had received no advantage from disqualifications.
No “Fixed Referee Assignments”
Other accusations included the successful “fixing” of referee assignments to tip the balance of calls in favor of Juve, but again, the Naples tribunal found no evidence either of Moggi’s interference significantly altering referee assignments or of Juventus receiving any real advantage on points due to referee error or controversial calls. Again, the conspiracy seems mysteriously ineffective.
No “System of Punishment and Reward”
The final part of the alleged plot was a system of reward or punishment to referees based on their dispositions toward Juve – those who favored Juve with their calls would find themselves advancing brilliantly in their careers, while those who hindered them would be subject to all manner of obstacles and suspensions. The tribunal once again found that this was simply not the case – in fact, if there was any connection between a referees advancement and the teams he tended to favor, it was more likely to be those who were lenient or favorable towards Juve who found themselves blocked or with their lives made difficult.
As for the famous story of Moggi locking referee Gianluca Paparesta in the dressing room in Reggio Calabria, the astonishing thing is how many people persist in believing it, considering that Paparesta himself has repeatedly denied that such an event ever took place.
Legitimate victories
All told, the Naples tribunal has already ruled, on the basis of this new evidence, that the 2004-05 season was unaltered by any illicit means, and that the results (and therefore the championship title won by Juventus) were valid and regular. Moggi himself, during the proceedings of the Naples tribunal, was indeed charged with attempted sporting fraud – but the attempts were, it is important to note, found to be completely unsuccessful in altering the results. It is also important to note, as the proceedings in the High Court have found, that Moggi was far from alone in his possible attempts at illicit behavior, and the new evidence indicates similar dubious actions from the directors of Milan and Inter among others. Calciopoli in short was both more widespread and less influential than originally thought, and the original verdict from the FIGC that pointed the finger at Juventus clearly deserves the revision it has been undergoing.
The End and The Beginning
On March 23, the Italian Supreme Court (Corte di Cassazione), after much-delayed and lengthy deliberations, released their final verdict on the Calciopoli case.
Luciano Moggi was acquitted of conspiracy to commit a crime under the statute of limitations, but also, more significantly, acquitted of two charges of sporting fraud due to lack of evidence. “Il fatto non sussiste”, read the verdict: The facts do not support the accusations.
The findings of the Naples tribunal which declared the 2004-05 season unaltered by any illicit activity were upheld.
A number of referees presumed to be controlled by Moggi’s “cabal” were acquitted entirely.
In effect, the Cassazione has confirmed and solidified the findings of the Naples tribunal, and admitted that much of the case built up that resulted in Juventus being docked points, relegated, and stripped of two titles (to say nothing of their loss in reputation and prestige, and the loss of many of their top players, and the massive financial losses caused by all the aforementioned) was built on little more than hearsay and inference. We have gone from a massive, intricate, dark web of intrigue and conspiracy strangling the entirety of the league – to one man, perhaps, attempting to pull a few strings. Luciano Moggi, most likely, is no saint. But neither, it appears, was he ever the puppet-master of a powerful cabal of corruption as we were led to believe in 2006.
This chapter of the ongoing story that is Calciopoli is finally closed, and it is the findings that have gone a long way towards clearing Juventus’ name which remain. Following this, in light of the new knowledge surrounding the proceedings of the case, Juventus are expected to sue the FIGC for mistrial in the court of sporting justice, and open a new case aimed at gaining financial compensation for their projected revenue lost over the past nine years. They will also attempt to regain their two revoked Scudetti. One very long story has ended and another will soon begin, but for Juventus, the corner has been turned.
Inteleg ca e mai simplu sa dati vina pe maffie, ce comod e sa spui "au castigat ca au inselat". Si de aici incolo, toata lumea isi va explica incompetenta prin asta. Nu sunt adeptul teoriei conspirationiste, dar daca exista acea maffie, inseamna ca sunt mai multi implicati. Totusi important ar fi sa urmaresti faptele, gen tribunal si curte suprema, nu tabloidele.
Mda, Marco, nu cred ca va citi nimeni tot ce ai scris. Eu am avut un coleg de munca care a lucrat la o casa de pariuri a unor interlopi timp 6 luni de zile si stiu despre ce vorbesc. Nu este normal ca o agentie de pariuri sa fie sponsorul unei echipe de fotbal, intelegi tu? Nu voi scrie exemplele pe care colegul meu mi le-a dat, dar nu e normal ce se intampla. Fotbalul e un sport prin care multi magnati si interlopi spala bani. Presedintele actual a lui Bayern din ce cauza a ajuns la puscarie? In fine, nu isi au rost discutiile. Fiecare crede ce vrea.
Bun, asta e altceva, in mod sigur exista multa mizerie in fotbal, peste tot unde se invart multi bani este multa mizerie. Hoeness a facut puscarie pentru evaziune fiscala, nu are legatura cu Bayern povestea.
Cica din sezonul viitor se va da cupa si pentru locul 2 din serie A. Iti spun din surse sigure.
Inclusa in mizeria asta sunt si blaturi stai linistit, atunci cand Barza a intors scorul cu PSG pe
Camp Nou pentru ca seicul sa nu scoata din buzunar cele 222 meleoane platite pe Nimenimar. Niste mizerii de penalty-uri. Daca ne uitam in ograda noastra in Liga 1, Dinamo-Lazio 1-2 sau 1-3 scorul. In care Lazio nu a jucat nimic prima repriza, conducea cu 1-0, scor care o trimitea in grupele CL de unde putea sa castige 5 mil euro. Surpriza, vinde meciul, il vinde pe Radu Stefan cu 5.4 mil. Iar in urma cu 2-3 ani s-a deschis si o ancheta pentru acel meci.
(edited)
Camp Nou pentru ca seicul sa nu scoata din buzunar cele 222 meleoane platite pe Nimenimar. Niste mizerii de penalty-uri. Daca ne uitam in ograda noastra in Liga 1, Dinamo-Lazio 1-2 sau 1-3 scorul. In care Lazio nu a jucat nimic prima repriza, conducea cu 1-0, scor care o trimitea in grupele CL de unde putea sa castige 5 mil euro. Surpriza, vinde meciul, il vinde pe Radu Stefan cu 5.4 mil. Iar in urma cu 2-3 ani s-a deschis si o ancheta pentru acel meci.
(edited)
N-ati inteles nimic din ce a spus Conte. El nu acuzat jucatorii ca nu au valoare ci ca nu au experienta competitiei si a unor astfel de meciuri. De aici vine referinta la echipa de provenienta, nicidecum nu si-a atacat jucatorii ca nu ar avea valoare... El incearca sa explice faptul ca un lot de CL inseamna sa bani mana adanc in buzunar si sa aduci inclusiv jucatori carora nu le tremura chilotii la imnul CL.
Cum spuneam, despre conspiratii putem discuta pana ne plictisim. Dinamo - Lazio vad ca s-a jucat pe 27 august 2007, Stefan Radu a fost imprumutat romanilor pe 1 ianuarie 2008 si cumparat definitiv pe 1 iulie 2008 pentru 3.85mil scrie transfermarkt. Si unde joaca astazi? E o legenda la Lazio, daca luau un jucator de umplutura pentru care sa plateasca spaga, scapau de el in 6 luni.
Despre Barca- PSG, ce sa mai zic. Au dat spaniolii spaga si seicii n-au avut bani? Iar sezonul trecut a platit Liverpool mai mult? :)
Cred ca o luam razna daca tot ne gandim la consipratii, pana la urma, oamenii astia iau o caruta de bani iar noi ne tocam creierii degeaba.
Despre Barca- PSG, ce sa mai zic. Au dat spaniolii spaga si seicii n-au avut bani? Iar sezonul trecut a platit Liverpool mai mult? :)
Cred ca o luam razna daca tot ne gandim la consipratii, pana la urma, oamenii astia iau o caruta de bani iar noi ne tocam creierii degeaba.
Eu am inteles bine, dar tu cum te-ai simti daca ar zice antrenorul despre tine, "ce vreti bai, cu zanetii asta sa castig grupa?" N-a fost prea diplomat.