UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%

  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%

  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%
  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
City Raider said:
In football business terms this is a war. It seems a lot of posturing has been done but we seem to be approaching the end game. The gloves are coming off but like most wars, no one will come out unscathed. I think they’ll back down.
Click to expand...

Bit like GoT then. Are we now Deanarys with a big fire breathing dragon and Uefa is Cersai cowering in Kings Landing
 
Last edited:
Fame Monster said:
I wouldn't be surprised if UEFA leaked it to see what City's reaction would be and whether we'd lie down and take it. Now that it's clear we'll be fighting them in the courts (if they ban us), they might make a different decision.
Click to expand...
City's statement is a clear pointer to UEFA that they neither trust them or have any faith in their integrity, pretty clear that were prepared to drag this already sullied organisation through the courts if needs br.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Cerefin was quoted as saying to Martin Lipton of The Sun at a summit in Dublin, around the time of the published leaks "Concrete case".

Perhaps the club would like to ask Lipton for his notes and recording.

Seemingly before the March 7 review.
Click to expand...

Not sure if Cerefin was speaking in english or not, but it might be lost in translation. If he was speaking in Slovenian, I am sure he said "specific" not "concrete"...
 
Newman Noggs said:
And on the same theme, if I did Twitter, I'd be inclined to put it out into the Twittersphere that;

"Timing of the leak means that fingers are being pointed at Rick Parry, former Liverpool CEO and member of UEFA's Club Financial Control Body Investigatory Chamber who are responsible for investigating Manchester City. It is known that the New York Times has close links to Liverpool FC having, at one time, been the second largest shareholder."

In fact, we should get it out there.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you need to start 'doing' twitter Newman!!
 
minimalistic said:
863f6313d20649d5fc9689142ec6bdbf.jpg
Click to expand...


Accor (French hotel chain, 10% owned by QIA, who have two board members. Accor are entering a 1bn deal with QIA to build hotels) - QNB (50% owned by QIA with the remaining %50 regular shareholders (limited to maximum of %25/%49 non-Qataris, can't tell which figure is correct) - and - Qatari Telecom (68% owned by QIA).

The timing of all this is extremely suspect.

Sorry if this has been highlighted already
 
The club response to the NYT article today, is IMO, our "crossing the Rubicon" moment in the fight against UEFA/Corrupt officials. By that, I mean, we appear to have committed to a specific course of action and there can only be one winner. From a legal standpoint that cannot be UEFA. By the NYT citing "people familiar with the case" in their report as the source, the CFCB ICs investigation is; either not independent nor committed to due process or that process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both. As the "people familiar with the case" would have to come from one of these sources, or both.

The statement says what we all know has been happening with their agenda against us but this is now pointed out in clear legal fact.That is fighting talk from City and i'm pretty sure there will be a lot of back tracking from UEFA as someone has made a big error in judgement on their side. Continuing with the military theme this might just be our El Alamein moment.

'Manchester City FC is fully cooperating in good faith with the CFCB IC's ongoing investigation.

'In doing so the club is reliant on both the CFCB IC's independence and commitment to due process; and on UEFA's commitment of the 7th of March that it '….will make no further comment on the matter while the investigation is ongoing'.

'The New York Times report citing 'people familiar with the case' is therefore extremely concerning.

'The implications are that either Manchester City's good faith in the CFCB IC is misplaced or the CFCB IC process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both.

'Manchester City's published accounts are full and complete and a matter of legal and regulatory record.


'The accusation of financial irregularities are entirely false, and comprehensive proof of this fact has been provided to the CFCB IC.'
 
dan05delaney said:
3 guesses what the lead article on the BBC homepage is...
Click to expand...

Yep, a story thats "if" as lead new story and on sports story, then "man City know Liverpool are here to stay-Robertson" story and a video of "Man City stars baffled by stick of Brighton rock". Nothing positive 48 hours after winning the PL but what do you expect from the BBC
 
IT and Me said:
That's extremely disconcerting to hear. I hope we had NDAs in place with said technical staff and are in the process of pursuing litigation againt any breaches made.
Click to expand...

From what I recall from a Daily Mail article, it was alleged former employees had taken stuff with them to their new roles, traced to using their former log-ins.
 
HellYeah said:
Bit like GoT then. Are we now Deanarys with a big fire breathing dragon and Uefa is Cersai cowering in Kings Landing
Click to expand...

Saddleworth2 said:
A few innocents got torched in that scenario. I think we need only go after the bad guys and expose the whole lickspittle bunch of cheats and crooks.
Click to expand...
Spoilers, lads, spoilers!

Think of the children!
 
IT and Me said:
The club response to the NYT article today, is IMO, our "crossing the Rubicon" moment in the fight against UEFA/Corrupt officials. By that, I mean, we appear to have committed to a specific course of action and there can only be one winner. From a legal standpoint that cannot be UEFA. By the NYT citing "people familiar with the case" in their report as the source, the CFCB ICs investigation is; either not independent nor committed to due process or that process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both. As the "people familiar with the case" would have to come from one of these sources, or both.

The statement says what we all know has been happening with their agenda against us but this is now pointed out in clear legal fact.That is fighting talk from City and i'm pretty sure there will be a lot of back tracking from UEFA as someone has made a big error in judgement on their side. Continuing with the military theme this might just be our El Alamein moment.

'Manchester City FC is fully cooperating in good faith with the CFCB IC's ongoing investigation.

'In doing so the club is reliant on both the CFCB IC's independence and commitment to due process; and on UEFA's commitment of the 7th of March that it '….will make no further comment on the matter while the investigation is ongoing'.

'The New York Times report citing 'people familiar with the case' is therefore extremely concerning.

'The implications are that either Manchester City's good faith in the CFCB IC is misplaced or the CFCB IC process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club's reputation and its commercial interests. Or both.

'Manchester City's published accounts are full and complete and a matter of legal and regulatory record.


'The accusation of financial irregularities are entirely false, and comprehensive proof of this fact has been provided to the CFCB IC.'
Click to expand...

That’s been very well written and pulls the rug from under UEFA - the next few weeks will be very interesting. UEFAs future is on the line here. It’s a joke of an organisation and City can if they chose expose it for the fraudulent organisation that it is. Hopefully that statement just pulled Rick Parry’s pants down!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top