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.
Are we definitely sure about this? The Uefa statement was pretty clear in saying we failed to co-operate, I’m not sure how that tallies to us providing a large dossier of evidence that they then just didn’t read. They’d have to have had a reason to feel empowered enough to put that sentence in the statement, particularly knowing as soon as they released it, we’d appeal.

They asked us for specific documents relating to their investigation. We failed to provide them. That's what the failed to co-operate bit is about and why they gave a more severe penalty.The fact we sent them 200 pages of other stuff that we did want them to see was ignored by them.
 
Which is why if the club has a strong case we may not stop at CAS.This fight has to be to the end really.
There's two issues I think. CAS will rule on UEFA's process but I very much doubt they'll rule on whether our accounts were all above board as we're claiming they are. So even if CAS clear us, there's still the battle to be fought against UEFA to clear our name. And that would be done in court I assume.
 
Are we definitely sure about this? The Uefa statement was pretty clear in saying we failed to co-operate, I’m not sure how that tallies to us providing a large dossier of evidence that they then just didn’t read. They’d have to have had a reason to feel empowered enough to put that sentence in the statement, particularly knowing as soon as they released it, we’d appeal.

@Prestwich_Blue
 
Yep but Man City lawyers cant be that naive! can they?

I'm just hoping that we're not reliant on precedence and what other clubs did or didn't do as our main defence. It may be that it adds to the strength of our appeal but it's risky if we do rely on it to a large degree.
 
It's great being a City fan isn't it? You get to become a financial expert, a legal expert and an expert on Middle East politics and protocol. And Barca say they're more than just a club.

One thing we can all safely say about our time supporting City is ... it has been terrible at times, and it has been fantastic at times, but it has never been boring.
 
There's two issues I think. CAS will rule on UEFA's process but I very much doubt they'll rule on whether our accounts were all above board as we're claiming they are. So even if CAS clear us, there's still the battle to be fought against UEFA to clear our name. And that would be done in court I assume.

Yes that's my thinking. I'm worried we'll lose at CAS which may make any other move bloody hard. It's alright the club making all these positive noises but they did last time and we failed. I know the goalposts were apparently moved and the " Take a pinch" speech but it does fill me with a bit of unease. There is a lot at stake here and a lot of powerful rich clubs in UEFA's corner so I wonder if we will get a fair hearing. Money talks and I don't trust any of them.
 
One thing we can all safely say about our time supporting City is ... it has been terrible at times, and it has been fantastic at times, but it has never been boring.
Yeah but this should be the the time we're enjoying our success after lifting trophies galore but we've never had the acknowledgement we've deserved after all the shite we've seen over the years and we've seen some shit lol.
 
Nipped over to the redcafe forum to see how they were seeing it, think it was page 29 and as normal the dippers all over it, one even pleading for support that if city gets points then they would have won two more titles.it gets quite funny at times - then a poster going by red Keane steps forward and wrote a great post explaining the position and why city were right.
Fair play to him, got some flack but held his own.
Thankfully we haven't got the others because it's comedy gold rubbish but thought it worth a read ( don't need to join to read)
 
Last edited:
Yes that's my thinking. I'm worried we'll lose at CAS which may make any other move bloody hard. It's alright the club making all these positive noises but they did last time and we failed. I know the goalposts were apparently moved and the " Take a pinch" speech but it does fill me with a bit of unease. There is a lot at stake here and a lot of powerful rich clubs in UEFA's corner so I wonder if we will get a fair hearing. Money talks and I don't trust any of them.
Money talks. Wealth whispers.
 
They asked us for specific documents relating to their investigation. We failed to provide them. That's what the failed to co-operate bit is about and why they gave a more severe penalty.The fact we sent them 200 pages of other stuff that we did want them to see was ignored by them.

you read the correspondence asking for it then? We've not co-operated since the initial farce around the charge. It's a token gesture charge.
 
H.H.: His Highness - i.e. he is royal. H.E.: His excellency - i.e. he is or has been a senior government appointee. So HH could be anyone of the brothers in the royal family.
HH apparently only refers to one person in this context
And its the head of the UAE not the sheikh
 
Sane is off anyways & Sterling fuck me he has just hit the wall..

I would put my mortgage on him being closely behind Leroy wanting out over this shit.

It's big money & it looks like we are going to need it..

We have options nobody is bigger than the club

Youngsters have to be given some games otherwise we have more Sancho's on our hands.

People dont realise the bigger picture & problem we have here.

I wouldnt be surprised if contracts are worth jack shit if found guilty???
we don't have a left winger ready to come through,looking one world class winger is an accident,two is totally stupidity
 
I've been thinking about this scenario. What if UEFA have used (as we suspect and hope) a pile of rubbish, nonsense and untruths as the basis for this sanction. Also let's suppose that hypothetically, they have followed the correct procedure and process throughout, although they haven't from what we know. Surely it cannot be the case that because the process was followed but their evidence is incorrect that the sanction, or a slightly lesser one, is allowed to stand. At some point there must be a function where the validity of their evidence is looked at and interrogated.
Yes, I cannot see an appeal judge saying - 'the evidence is shit and incomplete, but the shit and incomplete evidence was served on time, penalty upheld'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top