Bizarre. We did breach FFP rules and were sanctioned for it.
My understanding is that we will be asked to present our case, which we weren't able to do before the case was passed to the Adjudicatory Chamber. Despite that they tried to get us to accept a token punishment, which we refused to do. We will not accept that we did anything wrong and therefore won't agree to any punishment. And that's from the top.
These breakaway threats are all bluff. The complications are obvious. Without approval by UEFA and FIFA, this would mean a complete break including domestic competitions and international matches. It would take years of planning and the cooperation of the TV Companies and require ridiculous amounts of funding.UEFA are stuck between a rock and a hard place. The IC investigation was flawed on so many levels and Ceferin knows this which is why he turned up at City's last two CL games with an offer to find City guilty on a minor technicality and impose a small fine. City, quite rightly, told him to go forth and multiply. His masters in the 'establishment' clubs will be pressing him to punish City possibly with their old threat to duck out of the CL and form a breakaway competition. IMO this is why the 'decision' has been delayed so long. i.e. UEFA simply don't know what to do.
Slightly more off topic. Of all the county towns in the country, Derby has to have the worst restaurants, apart from Trowbridge, possibly.
Slightly more off topic. Of all the county towns in the country, Derby has to have the worst restaurants, apart from Trowbridge, possibly.
That’s fair comment about Carlisle. Oakham’s got some amazing food pubs in the villages around it.Must have something better than Carlisle which, admittedly, has a KFC. I can't imagine Oakham troubling the Michelin inspectors either.
These breakaway threats are all bluff. The complications are obvious. Without approval by UEFA and FIFA, this would mean a complete break including domestic competitions and international matches. It would take years of planning and the cooperation of the TV Companies and require ridiculous amounts of funding.
This happened in Rugby League in Australia way back and ended with two competing Leagues ARL and SuperLeague.
Celtic and the former Rangers have talked for the last 25 years about ‘breaking away’ from the Scottish Premiership. It was all bluff as no one else would have them.
Call their bluff!
When I worked in Carlisle for a spell, we usually eat at the Citadel. No complaints from me. I don’t know if it is still going?That’s fair comment about Carlisle. Oakham’s got some amazing food pubs in the villages around it.
And Oakham Brewery.That’s fair comment about Carlisle. Oakham’s got some amazing food pubs in the villages around it.
I get all moist when reading words like those.Which is exactly what they should have done at various points since before they formed.the PL in1992. Now is the time though because Arsenal and united, two of the G14 clubs at at their lowest ebb.
Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time.
Still need to get the rest of the machine at least being impartial, as I don’t see them being on our side.This is great. The investigatory chamber clearly did not hear our case but decided there was a case to answer ? That’s going to be difficult to defend later because UEFA have clearly not conducted a proper investigation if they haven’t involved City (and the club have confirmed they didn’t contact us and did not read the dossier we prepared). Having passed our case to the adjudicatory chamber (with a clear indication of guilt) we are asked to present our case - given we’ve been recommended for punishment isn’t this upside down - shouldn’t UEFA be the prosecution presenting their case to which we respond? I honestly think we’ve got uefa on the run and once we have cleared our name we should pursue them for deformation given the persistent leaks to the NYT et al which are all attributed to them. It’ll be interesting to see if we can get our foot on UEFS’s throat whether they disclose which clubs were driving this and the nature of the treats and underhand tactics. I honestly think the tied is turning in our favour here.
Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time. For their sake I hope the Adjudicatory Chamber doesn't try to be the prosecution and judges at the same time.
Sorry, have i missed a new development?Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time. For their sake I hope the Adjudicatory Chamber doesn't try to be the prosecution and judges at the same time.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.When you say "it's bound to leak", I think Rick Parry has left UEFA now to become Chairman of the EFL so maybe it won't. Indeed, the lack of leaks since September is telling in itself.
As for the rest of it. As you say, if true, it's an abuse of process. Charge within 5 years to beat the deadline and then start the investigation proper. It's such an abuse, putting UEFA in such a bind, I can't believe it really is the case.
A good point. That said Parry isn't the only possible leak meister.When you say "it's bound to leak", I think Rick Parry has left UEFA now to become Chairman of the EFL so maybe it won't. Indeed, the lack of leaks since September is telling in itself.
As for the rest of it. As you say, if true, it's an abuse of process. Charge within 5 years to beat the deadline and then start the investigation proper. It's such an abuse, putting UEFA in such a bind, I can't believe it really is the case.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.
A good point. That said Parry isn't the only possible leak meister.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.