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.
Tom Morgan at the DT....

New details emerge over Man City's dispute with Uefa prior to 2014 FFP sanctions.
 
The article in the Telegraph infers the club cannot discuss the details of the agreement in 2014 because of a confidentiality clause. It does sound as if there was some stuff that UEFA didn't want to come out.
 
KS55 said:
Like rewriting the rules?
Click to expand...

Exactly this. Its refered to in the article. I get the impression the scribbler wants to say something but can't. He refers to Cunnts, sorry Conns piece in the Guardian in inverted commas but still uses the word 'leaked' instead of 'hacked'. Its interesting if you read between the lines. imho.
 
Funny how this has resurfaced when we've started to string some results together again. They're hurting badly after we failed to implode after the Wolves defeat, that's what they all hope when we suffer a defeat ,pure implosion but it never happens you utter twats.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
What a piece of shit this Conn 'article' is.

Just for the record, as apparently the Liverpool hacking scandal has been deemed historical and settled at the time by the entire media, barring The Times, can Conn and his collaborators point out the difference between the two ongoing investigations?

Nope?

This is clearly another article to leave mud attached.

However, any City fan worth their salt, knew the details of why and how Uefa reached its previous ruling.

I wonder if the Guardian's puff piece will be picked up elsewhere...
Click to expand...

but why don’t we come out in public all guns blazing for a change? I understand we have to be a bit smart until they rule first but FFS we seem to sit and let the world believe all this bollocks!
 
I am sick to death with the shit press/media in the this country. Why is it against the 'rules' for a business person to but a company and invest as much money as he wants to try and make it a success. These rules were only brought in after the City take over. I would have thought these rules were against some sort of freedom to trade as it reduces your chances of making your company successful. Sounds like forming a cartel a monopoly to protect the old business, which I thought wasnt allowed in business.

I dont understand finance and law as I am just a simply bloke but from the out side looking in it looks like the big 14 trying to stop new comers which I thought was against European trading law or something like that.
 
give it to gordon said:
I am sick to death with the shit press/media in the this country. Why is it against the 'rules' for a business person to but a company and invest as much money as he wants to try and make it a success. These rules were only brought in after the City take over. I would have thought these rules were against some sort of freedom to trade as it reduces your chances of making your company successful. Sounds like forming a cartel a monopoly to protect the old business, which I thought wasnt allowed in business.

I dont understand finance and law as I am just a simply bloke but from the out side looking in it looks like the big 14 trying to stop new comers which I thought was against European trading law or something like that.
Click to expand...
Yes but you're surmising that EUFA actually work within the law.
 
GAZZA said:
Yes but you're surmising that EUFA actually work within the law.
Click to expand...

I simple terms are EUFA allowed to work outside the law ? If they are outside the free trade rights or what ever it's called they cant do anything. Unless by joining their club we have to play by their rules even if their rules are against the free trade laws
 
If in the week that the UEFA committee make their deliberations, the press exclusives relate to old news then that's not so bad.

I wonder if UEFA already know what they are going to do, and this is just a rubber-stamping process or whether this is a hearing in which everything is up for grabs? I hope the former as what evidence we have suggests UEFA are now reluctant to seriously sanction City.
 
When I read that article our losses are quite small compared to say the rags or RM etc. The fact that we are now debt free means our business plan works. So why arent the cartel put under pressure to reduce their debts.
This FFP is clearly geared to stop any new club coming up and that has to be against any law in any country ! .Citys 'crime' is investing heavy to produce a debt free business. It's that what happens in every takeover ?
 
Is Conn right about the transfer amortisation/wages issue? He says we were trying to offset both for players signed before 2010 but UEFA would only allow the wages element. I thought it was more a question of timing - that City followed the original guidelines and counted it over the whole of the first FFP period but UEFA decided it applied year by year and we overshot one year.

Also - if UEFA decided Etihad was a related party but the deal was fair value, does it really matter where the payment came from?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Daft as it may sound, I get the impression that a lot of that story has come from us you know. It seems to contain stuff that puts our case and I was told just before Xmas that we hadn't yet been able to do that formally in front of UEFA. It does also seem to say UEFA were clutching at straws.

David, being David, has to present both sides of the story however.
Click to expand...
So,Conn by name,Conn by nature. ;)
 
give it to gordon said:
Shame the powers that be arent as concerned about an owner that promotes his employees after they have committed hacking into another clubs pc's. Than again they are trying to use hacked emails to do us !
Click to expand...
Of course that might be another explanantion for why this story about us has appeared now. You'd think a paper as fearless and The Guardian would be all over the hacking story wouldn't you? Yet not a peep.
 
razman said:


From the article

The “adjudicatory chamber” of Uefa’s Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) is understood to be hearing the charges made against the club this week.
Click to expand...

For anyone sensible who doesn't want to click on that crap:-



The full article is here:-

http://web.archive.org/web/20200123...accounting-sponsorships-uefa-champions-league

It takes a few seconds extra to load the website. Always use DumpTheGuardian instead of linking directly to them.

https://theguardian.fivefilters.org/how-to-share/#howto
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top