With all due respect to everyone's opinion in here, But most of your posts are just wild speculations, That are carried away by emotional outbursts more than it's about an actual grounded truth, None of us in here have a real life acquaintance with laporta or rosell, We don't know what kind of person they are, And what exactly happened and is happening between them, All that i know, Is that in laporta's era great things happened, But the inevitable came, His time was done, And rosell took over, And things has been pretty much the same, Now that is what i see with my own eyes, That i know it's ture, Anything outside of this, Is where we start to enter the 'Unknown' territory, Where our imaginations start to play a big role.
Sorry mate, but you seem to be completely wrong here.
I won't go into the stuff other people here mentioned and explained over and over and over again. I'm just gonna provide you with a fact. Take a look at the recent court case:
This supreme court decision has no economical value. The club now has a title against Laporta which it can't enforce by law because of principles of equity and good faith (if those still apply in Spain). Should these principles, to my surprise, not apply, Laporta will have a demand vs the club to immediately pay back the deposited amount of money or a claim for return concerning the debt instrument which depends on how this guarentee had to be provided in the first place.
To make a long story short, this title has the value of zero. The only thing Laporta has to pay are the lawyers and the legal charges.
Naturally, the question arises what the whole point of this complain was. In the economic life, such court cases (like stock corporation vs. former member of board of directors) mainly serve public relations purposes, so the company can wash its' hands of responsibilty and blame it on someone else when something went horribly wrong. This doesn't apply here either, since there's nothing to white-wash and Laporta acted in the clubs best interest.
The only motive that logically remains is: Throwing dirt at Laporta for personal and political reasons, hoping that at least some of it sticks. As you can see, there's no emotions or imaginations involved, this is just plain and simple reasoning. In this case, the facts speak for themselves.
On that note; since I'm not too fond of such charades and also think that image complexes and delusions of grandeur should be lived out at home, Rosell should consider not running up for president again, on behalf of the club, and make room for someone else.
