Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Franco Carraro" in English language version.
The former president of the FIGC, Franco Carraro, was a former Mayor of Rome, deputy for the PSI and Tourism Minister in the 1980s. He was also president of MCC, a merchant bank owned by Capitalia. This bank was the major investor in a number of Serie A clubs, in particular, Roma, Parma and Lazio. The financial underwriting of Capitalia permitted a number of clubs to operate despite accruing considerable debt. The president of the FIGC is also overseer of Covisoc, the financial regulator for the league. In this position the president has a duty to maintain the financial probity and integrity of the league. However, this was compromised through Carraro's involvement with an organization that underwrites certain clubs' debts. Consequently, patrimonial networks are entrenched in a small number of dense family and personal connections.
The former president of the FIGC, Franco Carraro, was a former Mayor of Rome, deputy for the PSI and Tourism Minister in the 1980s. He was also president of MCC, a merchant bank owned by Capitalia. This bank was the major investor in a number of Serie A clubs, in particular, Roma, Parma and Lazio. The financial underwriting of Capitalia permitted a number of clubs to operate despite accruing considerable debt. The president of the FIGC is also overseer of Covisoc, the financial regulator for the league. In this position the president has a duty to maintain the financial probity and integrity of the league. However, this was compromised through Carraro's involvement with an organization that underwrites certain clubs' debts. Consequently, patrimonial networks are entrenched in a small number of dense family and personal connections.
Inter, which were awarded the 2006 league revoked from Juventus, violated Article 6 of the Sports Justice Code, the one about illicits. This is the conviction expressed by the [FIGC's] federal prosecutor, Stefano Palazzi, in the conclusions attached to the device on the open investigation 'as soon as we have received news of the new facts that have emerged and therefore before the complaint presented by Juventus ... The facts are lapsed, but the statute of limitations can be waived', confirms the federal prosecutor.
'I can't relegate Inter because Moratti spent a lot to buy [the club].'
'I can't relegate Inter because Moratti spent a lot to buy [the club].'
Inter, which were awarded the 2006 league revoked from Juventus, violated Article 6 of the Sports Justice Code, the one about illicits. This is the conviction expressed by the [FIGC's] federal prosecutor, Stefano Palazzi, in the conclusions attached to the device on the open investigation 'as soon as we have received news of the new facts that have emerged and therefore before the complaint presented by Juventus ... The facts are lapsed, but the statute of limitations can be waived', confirms the federal prosecutor.
FIGC's actions in relegating Juventus and handing the title to Inter Milan were somewhat peculiar. Of course, Moggi and Juventus deserved punishment; that is not up for dispute. However, the severity of the ruling and the new location for the Scudetto was unprecedented and arguably should never have happened. The final ruling in the Calciopoli years later judged that Juventus had never breached article 6. As a result, the Serie A champions should never have encountered a shock 1–1 draw away to Rimini in the season's curtain-raiser. Nor should they have trounced Piacenza 4–0 in Turin or handed a 5–1 thrashing away to Arezzo in Tuscany. The findings stated that some club officials had violated article 6, but none had originated from Juventus. FIGC created a structured article violation with their decision-making. This means that instead of finding an article 6 breach, several article 1 violations were pieced together to create evidence damning to warrant relegation from Italy's top flight. Article 1 violations in Italian football usually command fines, bans, or points deductions, but certainly not relegation.
FIGC's actions in relegating Juventus and handing the title to Inter Milan were somewhat peculiar. Of course, Moggi and Juventus deserved punishment; that is not up for dispute. However, the severity of the ruling and the new location for the Scudetto was unprecedented and arguably should never have happened. The final ruling in the Calciopoli years later judged that Juventus had never breached article 6. As a result, the Serie A champions should never have encountered a shock 1–1 draw away to Rimini in the season's curtain-raiser. Nor should they have trounced Piacenza 4–0 in Turin or handed a 5–1 thrashing away to Arezzo in Tuscany. The findings stated that some club officials had violated article 6, but none had originated from Juventus. FIGC created a structured article violation with their decision-making. This means that instead of finding an article 6 breach, several article 1 violations were pieced together to create evidence damning to warrant relegation from Italy's top flight. Article 1 violations in Italian football usually command fines, bans, or points deductions, but certainly not relegation.
