UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[Damanino]

Wonder what current sponsors will think about this. No way Puma, Nissan, Silver Lake etc are happy about this.

 

[DAGW]

The reputational damage is done regardless of the outcome. Even if we win it will be “City spend £200m on lawyers” “City buy their way out of trouble”

We had a lad at school who for some reason got tarnished with a story that he shagged his dog. I very much doubt he did and it was just malicious gossip but even today almost 40 years later, if his name is mentioned, the shagging a dog gets mentioned and therein lies the problem.

This is really shit news for the club and fans whichever way people want to spin it.

Kids are ruthless savages... and yet I regret to admit I’m still sniggering. we had a lad at school who was framed as fingering his cat. I doubt his name isn’t followed by a chorus of Meows to this day.

Goes to show that shit sticks, even if it ain’t yours.

 

[RayCTID]

PSG, they did try and tap up Yaya Toure after the second title win and they did find a way of signing both Neymar and Mbappe in one transfer window despite being under severe pressure themselves.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Was his dog a looker?

Does Lassie float your boat?

 

[salfordbluetrue]

UEFA say City did not fully cooperate with the investigation, most likely because they did not have access to the leaked email, which SUGGESTS City`s owners put more money into his company that sponsors us. So what would have happened if they had seen it and City still put up the price for our shirt sponsor? what could UEFA do, as it was investigated and found to be market value ? would UEFA say they were wrong or City are not allowed Market value?

 

[Robinho's Subbuteo]

Pep will go and Pochettino in.

Oh Joy. Someone who’s won a boat load of trophies replaced by someone who’s won fuck all.

 

[Ric]

Spoke to a couple of people at the club tonight and they seem pretty bullish which is giving me confidence about how we’ll respond to this.

 

[Robinho's Subbuteo]

Ffs Mahrez!

 

[Corky]

Wonder what current sponsors will think about this. No way Puma, Nissan, Silver Lake etc are happy about this.

Maybe they can get the same deal as Etihad are alleged to?

 

[dronefromsector7G]

Not until after I have had my Valentine’s Day blow job.

I’ll be there in ten minutes

 

[RayCTID]

Wonder what current sponsors will think about this. No way Puma, Nissan, Silver Lake etc are happy about this.

They are probably clued up on it and will continue to back us.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

If this is purely about the Etihad deal then the punishment is ridiculously harsh, and you’d fancy our chances of getting it overturned. The worry is that UEFA going balls out on this suggests there could be other stuff yet to come out. Impossible to say how this will play out at this stage.

Yes. I was surprised at the extension of the allegations to 2016. I don't recall that being mentioned before. I thought the issue was isolated to 2012/2013. It is also strange that some journalists were briefed at Christmas that a ban was unlikely. Something may have changed. But it is shocking that we are being hung out to dry by the media and UEFA have not even detailed what we have done wrong by hiding behind the CAS appeal.

 

[kaz7]

Ffs Mahrez!

Bobby's fault i've heard

 

[paulchapo]

The reputational damage is done regardless of the outcome. Even if we win it will be “City spend £200m on lawyers” “City buy their way out of trouble”

We had a lad at school who for some reason got tarnished with a story that he shagged his dog. I very much doubt he did and it was just malicious gossip but even today almost 40 years later, if his name is mentioned, the shagging a dog gets mentioned and therein lies the problem.

This is really shit news for the club and fans whichever way people want to spin it.

This is spot on......and no it wasn't the dog's name.....I think lol!

Any fool can spin a lie and no matter how outrageous that lie it sticks. Even if concrete proof is shown to disprove the lie you still get the " No smoke without fire" whispers.

To be honest the dippers rags and the rest will always say it no matter what the outcome.

 

[deano ou812]

We need a whistleblower to break ranks and tell the truth who is behind all this shit, the officials are just puppets for the cartel. Is anyone brave enough?

Money is king mate offer enough and someone will spill..

 

[Scottyboi]

Spoke to a couple of people at the club tonight and they seem pretty bullish which is giving me confidence about how we’ll respond to this.

Ric with his big connections these days, come along way from being steaming at europa away days haha.

 

[WRicko]

The key points for me are this

One it seems clear to me that we will not only fight this at CAS but at all available courts if necessary.

Will be interesting how other courts view the credibility and legal usefulness of the materials used to find us guilty. Der Speigel say they are not hacked but they must be either hacked or stolen even if leaked by someone at the club they are still surely work product. They have not been given to a regulatory body its not whistle blowing.

My understanding is we have been found found guilty of hiding where the money came from for our sponsorship but my understanding is that our sponsorship deals are not over inflated or third party so surely it does not really matter where the money comes from. A non related third party cannot get money from our owner in order to sponsor us or it would be a related third party. It seems to me that the very definition of what we are alleged to have done is logical fallacy Our Auditors and UEFAs experts both agree on not being related party right ?

Any ruling that basically says our sponsors are related causes issues for our Auditors UEFAs experts our sponsors investor and perhaps even tax authorities and other regulators in terms of credibility the top 4 auditors (not sure who city use) Not one of them has revenue below $29 billion whilst UEFA keeps hold of few billion a year of its revenue and distributes the rest They cannot afford the legal battle if it goes as badly as it could do.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

That's bad news if true. Always nore likely to succeed on the facts if they're on your side.

Also it means that even if we win we will still be guilty.

I'm resting my hopes that we have actually not broken the rules they claim on the old statement from ages back when the club said they supplied proof of innocence and UEFA have ignored it and first said theyd take it to a higher court...I think I'm remembering that rightly.

breaking the rules but is the evidence inadmissible?

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

The reputational damage is done regardless of the outcome. Even if we win it will be “City spend £200m on lawyers” “City buy their way out of trouble”

We had a lad at school who for some reason got tarnished with a story that he shagged his dog. I very much doubt he did and it was just malicious gossip but even today almost 40 years later, if his name is mentioned, the shagging a dog gets mentioned and therein lies the problem.

This is really shit news for the club and fans whichever way people want to spin it.

Was his name roy keane by any chance?

 

[paulchapo]

Money is king mate offer enough and someone will spill..

I thought that but that is just too risky, how they would just love that, bribery added to everything else.