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.
chaddblue. You're probably right about Liverpool hacking into our club. Surely you don't expect UEFA to do anything about it. They will do absolutely nothing, as along as both Messers Parry and Gill are involved in UEFA. Afterall they are the from the two darling clubs in England namely the rags and Livarpool
 
King KdB of Belgium said:
chaddblue. You're probably right about Liverpool hacking into our club. Surely you don't expect UEFA to do anything about it. They will do absolutely nothing, as along as both Messers Parry and Gill are involved in UEFA. Afterall they are the from the two darling clubs in England namely the rags and Livarpool
Click to expand...
They both hate each other but as the saying goes "my enemy's enemy is my friend".
 
LUrAlsa.jpg
 
SebastianBlue said:
Me thinks Ziegler has been given quite a bit of proprietary information.


Click to expand...


The link to the Times story is here, but it's behind a paywall - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...commendation-court-documents-reveal-30rw9v5tf

However, you can access two articles per week for free if, as I do, you have a registration with them.

Obviously, there are rules about copying and pasting on here so I'll add just a couple of interesting extracts. There seems to have been a lot of bluster in response from Yves Leterme, who's quoted as answering MCFC at length, including the following: "Your allegations are groundless in the merits and unacceptable in tone. Please be advised that I will not continue such an exchange of correspondence and that I will not respond further to groundless accusations directed against me personally and/or against my fellow members of the IC."

And the last paragraph of Ziegler's story reads as follows: "The CAS findings describe the alleged leaking of information about the proceedings against Manchester City as “worrisome” and added: “It puzzles the panel how the CFCB Chief Investigator could be so confident to ‘vehemently reject [MCFC’s] allegations of unlawful activities’ but dismissed the club’s claim that Uefa’s finance bodies could no longer deal with the case impartially”.
 
petrusha said:
The link to the Times story is here, but it's behind a paywall - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...commendation-court-documents-reveal-30rw9v5tf

However, you can access two articles per week for free if, as I do, you have a registration with them.

Obviously, there are rules about copying and pasting on here so I'll add just a couple of interesting extracts. There seems to have been a lot of bluster in response from Yves Leterme, who's quoted as answering MCFC at length, including the following: "Your allegations are groundless in the merits and unacceptable in tone. Please be advised that I will not continue such an exchange of correspondence and that I will not respond further to groundless accusations directed against me personally and/or against my fellow members of the IC."

And the last paragraph of Ziegler's story reads as follows: "The CAS findings describe the alleged leaking of information about the proceedings against Manchester City as “worrisome” and added: “It puzzles the panel how the CFCB Chief Investigator could be so confident to ‘vehemently reject [MCFC’s] allegations of unlawful activities’ but dismissed the club’s claim that Uefa’s finance bodies could no longer deal with the case impartially”.
Click to expand...
Yes, I added a link to the original article above, and appreciate your following the rules regarding not copying-and-pasting in entire articles. :-)

The entire affair reeks of someone (or multiple people) at UEFA, or connected with those at UEFA, being privy to the Chief Investigator’s leanings and wanting to release this information in advance of any actual action (which may have never included an actual competition ban) in order to materially damage the club’s brand and standing. The CI may not have been aware of the leak at the time — that could be legitimate — but their response after it was revealed does not make sense. There is absolutely no reason he could be “confident” in his rejection of our complaint, nor of the lack of unlawful action on the part of someone directly or indirectly affiliated with his investigation. It screams of the CI and others being instructed to cover it up as best as they can.

Now, who would benefit from such an action, I wonder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.