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.
Blue Mist said:
Who did it take by surprise ? Posters on here may have said we would not be banned and are now surprised but as the club have said very little and none to my knowledge post on here, we don't know what they thought would happen. I wish people would not believe everything that is posted on BM. The guy that owns us bought us for 200 mill, he sold 11% to the Chinese for 200 mill. This guy knows what he is doing. Lawyers can send letters and that is about it until they stand up in court. We have not been allowed near a court. Please explain why you think the club and its lawyers were taken by surprise.
Click to expand...

I heard from someone very close to the club with access to a lot of sources and who is a sound bloke and I have no reason to doubt, that whatever we say in public, we were not expecting this and it has come as a surprise.
 
Well this has come as a shock to me,from reading bullish posts on here previously before today’s decision,uefa must have some concrete evidence to go all in with not only a 2 year ban but a fine as well,just hope that the club haven’t fucked up somewhere along the line regarding ffp and sponsorship deals,and even if we do get this overturned it’s the mud that’s been flung that sticks,the reputation of the club has been tarnished by all this shit ..
 
I wonder if this is the worst thing an English club has been banned from Europe for?
giphy.gif
 
tonea2003 said:
all or nothing mate, we wont be accepting any reduced ban, if we genuinely haven't done anything wrong as the club statement implies
Click to expand...

We probably have done it though. But hearsay on a hacked e-mail isn't "proof", if we were sensible all computer dumps were destroyed shortly after the leaks. The accounts signed off are legal documents and say money came from Etihad, very difficult to refute. CAS have to use the evidence and decide which to believe.
 
nellyonthewing said:
If it is the case that we broke the letter of the EUFA laws then heads need to roll. We have huge wealth and resources and yet our IT ,our PR and legal teams are a source of institutional weakness and need fixing rapidly. We should have the best on our books so that the cartel mafia Eufa ,EPL, & FA are not outwitting us.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. I know one of our IT related sponsors wouldn't be entirely happy with what some of the young staff at City try and get away with. If that's replicated throughout the club, then this is what we deserve. City/our owners should be dilgent from top to bottom. Are we trying to rush our way to the top maybe? If City were meant to be some PR trick for Abu Dhabi this isn't working now. It's damaging for our club to be honest.
 
Agendas being played out, hopefully CAS will provide reprieve but City visibly being singled out. I think their model has been a great one and while they certainly could sustain the blow if the ban sticks it would also, definitively, derail a quite specific global project they put so much into building brick by brick

The agendas however, just a reminder that football is varying shades of corrupt from top to bottom
 
domalino said:
This is also from the leaked emails and seems to suggest the club are not idiots, and we only got paid by Etihad.

“I need to understand the mechanism by which additional sponsorship flows through ADUG. Ii [sic] it ADUG Shareholder->ADUG->Etihad->MCFC? Or is it rather ADUG Shareholder->Etihad->MCFC?,” Chumillas wrote.
​
Going by this, I don't see what grounds UEFA have to say ADUG or Mansour paid the money, because Chumillas clearly thinks Etihad are paying in both instances, and where Etihad get their money is none of their fucking business.



Disguised owner funding and over-inflated sponsorships are the same thing in this case. They're saying that we inflated the value of the Etihad deal by 57m because Etihad only paid 8m and Mansour secretly paid the rest.​
Click to expand...

If true, what an idiotic thing to put in an email. That's what what the private telephone line is for.

I don't think we are squeeky clean in this by any means. I think we've done what we needed to do work around the rules and regulations that have been imposed to basically stop us from progressing.

Hopefully we've done enough to convince an independent board that there isn't a case to answer. I'm expecting the 2yr ban was UEFAs way of pricing in a compromise in the CAS ruling down to a year.

What this means for Peps future, who knows. I've been saying for a while that he either needs to sign up for the journey or leave in the summer. The squad needs refreshing and if hes only here another year is he the man to do it? That's a discussion for a different thread though.
 
Millwallawayveteran1988 said:
I heard from someone very close to the club with access to a lot of sources and who is a sound bloke and I have no reason to doubt, that whatever we say in public, we were not expecting this and it has come as a surprise.
Click to expand...
I cant see how anyone high up at the club could be surprised, if they are then they're probably in the wrong job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top