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.
lancs blue said:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...er-treatment-of-paris-saint-germain-wr5vz29n5

Here's the full text of that Times article.

One of Uefa’s financial fair play investigators has resigned over the organisation’s handling of its case against Paris Saint Germain.

Petros Mavroidis, a Greek law professor, is understood to be unhappy that Uefa did not mount a defence in the Court of Arbitration for Sport after PSG’s lawyers claimed that the Uefa’s Club Financial Control Body’s (CFCB) adjudicatory panel had missed a ten-day deadline to review the case.

Mavroidis is also believed to have questioned the handling of the FFP case against AC Milan, despite the Italian side being excluded from European competition this season.

Uefa has since changed the wording of its FFP rules to ensure that other clubs do not use the same loophole in the future. Galatasaray, the Turkish club, had already won a CAS ruling on the ten-day deadline – Uefa did not defend that case on the advice of its lawyers and the CFCB’s investigatory chamber, nor the following case brought by PSG in March this year.

Uefa’s initial investigation was to examine whether PSG had flouted rules aimed at preventing clubs from spending more than they generate through revenues. The French club have previously been sanctioned by Uefa for breaching FFP rules, in 2014 when Manchester City were given the same penalty.

City are also involved in a new FFP case which has yet to be ruled on – proceedings were opened after leaked emails suggested the club had provided misleading financial information. City have gone to CAS to challenge the legitimacy of Uefa’s investigation.

Mavroidis, who is also a professor at Columbia Law School in New York, was due to step down as an investigator at the end of the season anyway as his term was up. It is believed he was unhappy with the approaches to both the Galatasaray and the PSG hearings.

Mavroidis refused to comment to The Times, saying: “I would not like to speak in public about my involvement with a Uefa committee.”

In June 2018, the CFCB’s investigatory panel had recommended that Uefa close an investigation into PSG’s finances in the three years running up to the summer of 2017, before the club signed Neymar and Kylian Mbappe. That recommendation was not unanimous however, with some of the investigators including Mavroidis believing the panel should have recommended opening proceedings.

In September, the CFCB adjudicatory panel reviewed the PSG decision and said it should go back for further investigation – the court ruled however that was outside a ten-day deadline for a review stated in the rules.

Since the outcome of the CAS hearing, Uefa has clarified its rules so that the adjudicatory panel now has 10 days to call in a case and 20 days to review it.

Uefa has since said that it has no existing investigations open against PSG. All clubs in European competition have to show they are breaking even over a rolling three-year period.

In its ruling on PSG in March, CAS said: “The review conducted by the adjudicatory chamber should have taken place within ten days and that since the challenged decision was issued beyond the ten-day time limit, the challenged decision was untimely and must be annulled.”
Click to expand...
Greeks complaining about the financial dealings of others seems rather ironic.
 
lancs blue said:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...er-treatment-of-paris-saint-germain-wr5vz29n5

Here's the full text of that Times article.

One of Uefa’s financial fair play investigators has resigned over the organisation’s handling of its case against Paris Saint Germain.

Petros Mavroidis, a Greek law professor, is understood to be unhappy that Uefa did not mount a defence in the Court of Arbitration for Sport after PSG’s lawyers claimed that the Uefa’s Club Financial Control Body’s (CFCB) adjudicatory panel had missed a ten-day deadline to review the case.

Mavroidis is also believed to have questioned the handling of the FFP case against AC Milan, despite the Italian side being excluded from European competition this season.

Uefa has since changed the wording of its FFP rules to ensure that other clubs do not use the same loophole in the future. Galatasaray, the Turkish club, had already won a CAS ruling on the ten-day deadline – Uefa did not defend that case on the advice of its lawyers and the CFCB’s investigatory chamber, nor the following case brought by PSG in March this year.

Uefa’s initial investigation was to examine whether PSG had flouted rules aimed at preventing clubs from spending more than they generate through revenues. The French club have previously been sanctioned by Uefa for breaching FFP rules, in 2014 when Manchester City were given the same penalty.

City are also involved in a new FFP case which has yet to be ruled on – proceedings were opened after leaked emails suggested the club had provided misleading financial information. City have gone to CAS to challenge the legitimacy of Uefa’s investigation.

Mavroidis, who is also a professor at Columbia Law School in New York, was due to step down as an investigator at the end of the season anyway as his term was up. It is believed he was unhappy with the approaches to both the Galatasaray and the PSG hearings.

Mavroidis refused to comment to The Times, saying: “I would not like to speak in public about my involvement with a Uefa committee.”

In June 2018, the CFCB’s investigatory panel had recommended that Uefa close an investigation into PSG’s finances in the three years running up to the summer of 2017, before the club signed Neymar and Kylian Mbappe. That recommendation was not unanimous however, with some of the investigators including Mavroidis believing the panel should have recommended opening proceedings.

In September, the CFCB adjudicatory panel reviewed the PSG decision and said it should go back for further investigation – the court ruled however that was outside a ten-day deadline for a review stated in the rules.

Since the outcome of the CAS hearing, Uefa has clarified its rules so that the adjudicatory panel now has 10 days to call in a case and 20 days to review it.

Uefa has since said that it has no existing investigations open against PSG. All clubs in European competition have to show they are breaking even over a rolling three-year period.

In its ruling on PSG in March, CAS said: “The review conducted by the adjudicatory chamber should have taken place within ten days and that since the challenged decision was issued beyond the ten-day time limit, the challenged decision was untimely and must be annulled.”
Click to expand...
Law school professor in New York. Funny enough the same place as many of those leaks came out.
 
TheThirdDeano said:
Simply because of the leaks in the past, whether they’re true or not;
We’re attacking their process not the verdict, and a guilty verdict was leaked ages ago, if they delivered that they’d be fucked.
And as @Newman Noggs alluded to; they’re probably doing an internal enquiry on their decision process at ours and CAS’ behest they’d be mental to deliver any verdict in the midst of that
Click to expand...
Genuine question mate. When was the guilty verdict leaked and what was the outlet?
 
Don't think it makes any difference if he is an investigator. Our case has gone beyond that now.

Doesn't speak well of the professionalism of UEFA's team if their staff are constantly talking to the press about cases past and present.
 
Gray said:
Spot on, how were they allowed membership of the EU.

Ah! Almost forgot the Germans and British will bail them out.
Click to expand...

I know it's not really anything to do with the thread, but...I don't think the British had much if anything to do with the Greek bailouts. But our investment companies certainly helped them get in the mess they are in currently, but the Germans are certainly getting their pound of flesh from the greeks. Allegedly, of course!
 
TheThirdDeano said:
NY Times; a lad called Tariq Panja posted a bunch of shit, here's one example.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/sports/manchester-city-champions-league-uefa.html
Click to expand...
Cheers mate, I'll have a read. Bound to make my blood boil.
TheThirdDeano said:
NY Times; a lad called Tariq Panja posted a bunch of shit, here's one example.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/13/sports/manchester-city-champions-league-uefa.html
Click to expand...
Top man. I'll have a read this evening. Bound to make my blood boil.
 
Jazzman said:
Law school professor in New York. Funny enough the same place as many of those leaks came out.
Click to expand...
And he works at the same University which has published very revealing articles about the Rui Pinto case (via the Columbia Journalism Review) That said I don't believe he is the leaker...but he might know someone else on the committee who is!
 
Marvin said:
Don't think it makes any difference if he is an investigator. Our case has gone beyond that now.

Doesn't speak well of the professionalism of UEFA's team if their staff are constantly talking to the press about cases past and present.
Click to expand...
They still mainly suffer with hubris and flout the sometimes unwritten laws that make professional people.
Is this particular leak however in conflict with their own rules or code of conduct?
 
Have we been banned yet?

This could be another (Football) Brexit scenario. ;-)
 
SilverFox2 said:
They still mainly suffer with hubris and flout the sometimes unwritten laws that make professional people.
Is this particular leak however in conflict with their own rules or code of conduct?
Click to expand...
Apparently they gave City a promise that all discussions would be kept confidential. Hmmm...
City's statement after the UEFA leak was particularly scathing on this point.
 
KS55 said:
Apparently they gave City a promise that all discussions would be kept confidential. Hmmm...
City's statement after the UEFA leak was particularly scathing on this point.
Click to expand...
Maybe not against their rules then but certainly an indication of their inability to control even at the highest level.
Should help with our appeal to CAS then as an example ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top