Even BBC radio Manchester, you know, our local station, failed to go into any kind of detail as to why it “failed” and what it all actually means truthfully, pretty bad really that even they are happy to go along the sensationalist line.Meanwhile the headline tickers still scroll on CNN, Sky, BBC et al - that our challenge has 'failed'
I can accept the use of the word 'failure' as we appealed to CAS but failed to have that appeal heard.Meanwhile our reputation continues to be deliberately damaged by US owned/influenced media reports of 'Man City's failure'
- not looking a great deal in PR terms at least currently.
I'd say you're wrong on that last bit as the 5 year time limit for reopening a case has passed. UEFA is now time-barred from bringing a case that relates to the 2014 settlement. This is their only shot at this.CAS rejected our appeal it on a technicality. It doesn't mean that that the reason for the appeal goes away. Like the sun rising and setting it is a fact that UEFA broke their own FFP process rules as they DIDN'T respond to City's deposition as they are supposed to do.
I'm actually quite pleased they did, as a victory at CAS would simply have resulted in UEFA having to rerun the previous investigatory phase. Now, CAS can kick the whole judgement out when it is made.
We shall see how strong our case is when the AC files it's judgement. It could kick the process back to the investegtory phase due to a bad process.
Yes, you're probably right, but don't be under the impression the likes of the Dippers are universally adored.This is essentially it, in a nutshell!
No one likes us, no one respects us, everyone's waiting for the day we crash and burn. Journalists will forever shit stir, pundits will forever make snidey comments, refs will do their best to fuck us over, social media will forever brand us as cheats.
Get used to it and accept it everyone but my god if or when we win stuff just think how much its killing them all inside.
It could still be their way out of delivering a ban.I'd say you're wrong on that last bit as the 5 year time limit for reopening a case has passed. UEFA is now time-barred from bringing a case that relates to the 2014 settlement. This is their only shot at this.
It's no great secret. It's been said already that UEFA mugged us in 2013 when they assured us a number of times that we were on course to meet the requirements to be able to use the get-out clause in FFP involving wages paid in our 2012 accounts. Then as soon as we'd filed those accounts they shafted us by changing the rules so we couldn't then use it. And then had the cheek to punish us for it.
It's also been said on here that the American owned clubs, particularly the rags and dippers, are the main source of negative stories against us. Then there's Spygate and there's a reason why that was brought up. My suspicion is that something else has been going on more recently with that & the club wanted to send a warning shot across Liverpool's bows.
You really don't have to be Masterspy to make the link to the former CEO's of those two clubs who are in powerful positions at UEFA.
I'd say you're wrong on that last bit as the 5 year time limit for reopening a case has passed. UEFA is now time-barred from bringing a case that relates to the 2014 settlement. This is their only shot at this.
Another way of looking at it - if CAS had upheld our appeal, we would have faced the accusation 'Well, you only got off on a technicality because UEFA cocked up'. In any case, we want to win the case on the facts - not a technicality. Khaldoon is so right on this point.That's the puzzling thing for me. None of the journalists is asking this question. Something has been going on and my suspicion is that CAS & UEFA have been waiting for each other to make the first move. "After you". "No. After you". "I absolutely insist" etc.
If UEFA had made a final decision then CAS can hear the appeal (if they find us guilty & we want to pursue it) or can drop it (if not). On the other hand, if CAS do decide to hear the appeal before UEFA hand down their final decision then that could stymie any decision they make. I wonder if they finally decided to talk to each other with CAS agreeing to reject our appeal so that UEFA could announce their decision. That's what should have happened in the first place after all.
Or maybe (and this has just occurred to me) CAS felt there were serious deficiencies in the process UEFA followed, serious enough not to reject our appeal out of hand as they should have done, and were holding off until UEFA agreed to remedy some of the deficiencies and allow us to present the evidence we felt had been ignored originally by the IC in their haste to beat the statute of limitations. That would mean there had been some horse-trading behind the scenes between us, CAS and UEFA to get to this point.
And that is precisely what makes me twitchy. In the last decade we have cost the PL old guard (the rags, the dippers and the Arse, primarily) a small fortune. Not only have we robbed them of trophies and prestige in equal measure, but also bucketloads of cash as we have qualified for the CL several times directly at one of theirs expense. Given the bitter rhetoric that has come out of Tebas and JW Henry in the none too distant past, I'm loathe to believe they're going to let UEFA pass up this one time opportunity to nobble us. Much as I want to believe Sam Lee's version of future events, I'm not going to allow myself to, partly because the thought of worsting them is so delicious. If we ever get to the point where we serve Delaney, Lipton and Harris with a writ, I might just wet myself
David Conn is almost certainly correct that the case will go before the AC in December but that far from meaning that consideration of a verdict/punishment only begins then. This is a highly sensitive question and the consequences for both City and UEFA could be immense and long lasting. Whether its horse trading, plea bargaining it will be going on and it should go on.
PB has shown yet more serious faults in UEFA's case and also the implication of officials who can hardly be other than hostile to City. One of these officials is closely connected to a club involved in hacking our data bases. I think you are right, PB, that City do want to end all the nonsense Liverpool are involved in and I suspect, as a result, City will be exonerated, Parry will be quietly kicked out and Liverpool be warned that Spygate and anything else Liverpool may have been involved in, can be used against them in court, if necessary.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that so many threads are coming together and I think City would be happy with such an outcome because, after all, City's business is football not revolution.
To be honest, I couldn't figure out why we had the eagle (I know the story now). It should have been a pigeon. But that's an argument for another day...Does anyone else just hanker for the days when all we had to defend was the fact we had three stars above our eagle for 'decorative' reasons?
That makes sense. A literal reading of his article is that the IC has deposited its evidence and come December the AC will pick it up and review it. For the Athletic to be right then it must have discussed subsequent to the IC referral. I know these things are basic things. Perhaps Conn chose just to report the known facts and timeline and deliberately kept out of the speculation.Sam Lee said on the podcast with Ahsan that the AC has been looking at this the whole time the IC's decision was being fought over at CAS
The key term there is 'BBC'. Establishment broadcasting.Even BBC radio Manchester, you know, our local station, failed to go into any kind of detail as to why it “failed” and what it all actually means truthfully, pretty bad really that even they are happy to go along the sensationalist line.
If the CAS and UEFA AC is a genuine evidence-based process, last chances and motive wont count.And that is precisely what makes me twitchy. In the last decade we have cost the PL old guard (the rags, the dippers and the Arse, primarily) a small fortune. Not only have we robbed them of trophies and prestige in equal measure, but also bucketloads of cash as we have qualified for the CL several times directly at one of theirs expense. Given the bitter rhetoric that has come out of Tebas and JW Henry in the none too distant past, I'm loathe to believe they're going to let UEFA pass up this one time opportunity to nobble us. Much as I want to believe Sam Lee's version of future events, I'm not going to allow myself to in advance of the actual event, partly because the thought of worsting them is so delicious. If we ever get to the point where we serve Delaney, Lipton and Harris with a writ, I might just wet myself
City's CAS referral failed. It failed on a technicality. I think we are being over-sensitive in respect of that.The key term there is 'BBC'. Establishment broadcasting.
Does the background make much difference?Another way of looking at it - if CAS had upheld our appeal, we would have faced the accusation 'Well, you only got off on a technicality because UEFA cocked up'. In any case, we want to win the case on the facts - not a technicality. Khaldoon is so right on this point.
It's City that are under investigation. We are not in a position to finish anyone.We have to go for the kill, if we have the cards use them, shame them & finish them!
I can accept the use of the word 'failure' as we appealed to CAS but failed to have that appeal heard.
What I have been challenging is the use of words like 'lost'. That suggests we appealed, the case was heard and our arguments were rejected in favour of those of our opponents. If you lose an appeal then you can't go back to the same body with the same appeal whereas we are quite at liberty to return to CAS once the Adjudicatory Chamber has formally made its decision.
Its the same as Dupont's case against FFP, which many media commentators said he'd "lost". No he hadn't. The case was about the competency of the Belgian & European courts to hear the case, not the case itself.
I'm going to be a pedant & pick you up on terminology. CAS never heard our appeal but stated that the UEFA Adjudicatory chamber was the competent body to complete the process, rather than them.Another way of looking at it - if CAS had upheld our appeal, we would have faced the accusation 'Well, you only got off on a technicality because UEFA cocked up'. In any case, we want to win the case on the facts - not a technicality. Khaldoon is so right on this point.