You think CAS will ignore 'the evidence' and how it was obtained, to come to the conclusion that we are guilty of something? Does the word 'Court' in their name not give a clue?why are people so confident that if 'found guilty' and given a ban, CAS would overturn that ruling in our favour?
This is different to any other previous FFP case, including our own punishment. From what i understand, So far, clubs have (including ourselves) been accused of breaching FFP limits, and CAS simply ruled that the punishments were disproportionate and unfair, not that the breach didn't occur. In some cases, the punishment was avoided, in n others suspended (but still applied).
What we are accused of is different, it is not breaching ffp, it is misleading uefa and book-fixing, effectively claimed as cheating. It no longer becomes a simple, is the punishment too onerous for the breach (of a shit rule), and the message CAS would be sending puts a different pressure on the whole thing, if we are found guilty by Uefa.
Putting aside all the crap, about how this came about, the 'evidence', the behind the scenes plays etc etc, it is a bit different in principle to other CAS cases.
While i do like how strongly the club have approached this and how resolute they aeem, as much as a long battle would be damaging for uefa, long term, it might not be the best outcome for us. surely, no punishment or need to appeal would be better, and uefa finding a way out of finding us 'guilty' would be preferred. for me at least. the time to challenge ffp was 2014, a bit different now.
CAS only rule on process and procedure, so things like whether UEFA have dealt with our case fairly and in line with their own process. What we may or may not have done as regards FFP is of little or no interest to them. So it's no different to any other case they've heard in that sense.
You think CAS will ignore 'the evidence' and how it was obtained, to come to the conclusion that we are guilty of something? Does the word 'Court' in their name not give a clue?
As said above, there has been no confirmation that UEFA are working off anything but Der Spiegel s online media ramblings.
We didn't do it, guv. Or, as Khaldoon said, "Our Accounts are a matter of public record."why are people so confident that if 'found guilty' and given a ban, CAS would overturn that ruling in our favour?
This is different to any other previous FFP case, including our own punishment. From what i understand, So far, clubs have (including ourselves) been accused of breaching FFP limits, and CAS simply ruled that the punishments were disproportionate and unfair, not that the breach didn't occur. In some cases, the punishment was avoided, in n others suspended (but still applied).
What we are accused of is different, it is not breaching ffp, it is misleading uefa and book-fixing, effectively claimed as cheating. It no longer becomes a simple, is the punishment too onerous for the breach (of a shit rule), and the message CAS would be sending puts a different pressure on the whole thing, if we are found guilty by Uefa.
Putting aside all the crap, about how this came about, the 'evidence', the behind the scenes plays etc etc, it is a bit different in principle to other CAS cases.
While i do like how strongly the club have approached this and how resolute they aeem, as much as a long battle would be damaging for uefa, long term, it might not be the best outcome for us. surely, no punishment or need to appeal would be better, and uefa finding a way out of finding us 'guilty' would be preferred. for me at least. the time to challenge ffp was 2014, a bit different now.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sk...eague-open-investigation-into-manchester-city
The FA investigation was about Sancho and has concluded.
why are people so confident that if 'found guilty' and given a ban, CAS would overturn that ruling in our favour?
This is different to any other previous FFP case, including our own punishment. From what i understand, So far, clubs have (including ourselves) been accused of breaching FFP limits, and CAS simply ruled that the punishments were disproportionate and unfair, not that the breach didn't occur. In some cases, the punishment was avoided, in n others suspended (but still applied).
What we are accused of is different, it is not breaching ffp, it is misleading uefa and book-fixing, effectively claimed as cheating. It no longer becomes a simple, is the punishment too onerous for the breach (of a shit rule), and the message CAS would be sending puts a different pressure on the whole thing, if we are found guilty by Uefa.
Putting aside all the crap, about how this came about, the 'evidence', the behind the scenes plays etc etc, it is a bit different in principle to other CAS cases.
While i do like how strongly the club have approached this and how resolute they aeem, as much as a long battle would be damaging for uefa, long term, it might not be the best outcome for us. surely, no punishment or need to appeal would be better, and uefa finding a way out of finding us 'guilty' would be preferred. for me at least. the time to challenge ffp was 2014, a bit different now.
But will be reopened in six yearshttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sk...eague-open-investigation-into-manchester-city
The FA investigation was about Sancho and has concluded.
Uefa persuaded the EU commission that sport was a special case.Why is it against the rules of UEFA for a person to buy a company (football club) that isnt doing very well, than invest in the company and after 10 years turn that struggling company into a very successful profit making company. I would have thought having a successful company would be good for the imagine if UEFA, and it could encourage other people to buy struggling clubs and try to repeat the success. It can only be good to have well run successful clubs both on and of the field.
Just on a layman's term wont UEFA be breaking the European law by perverting someone from investing in his company ?. That would imply that UEFA is a closed shop and against free and fair trade.