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

[citymike1969]

Both City and UEFA get to pick one sitting judge each on a panel of three.

It will come down to who the 'independent' is.

... does anyone have any knowledge of who this independent may be and how they would be selected?

 

[mayo31]

Ignorant of UEFA' rules however unfair they may be.

I not having that, they would have known the 'rules', its more how the rules have been applied

 

[Marvin]

If they can assess the evidence in the light of UEFA's FFP regs then I would be quite confident based on information that's already in the public domain. Many journalists have already decided City's guilt based on their affiliation and prejudice.

Rule 57 of the CAS procedural code starts with the following sentence :

R57 Scope of Panel’s Review – Hearing
The Panel has full power to review the facts and the law.

I read that as meaning CAS can rule on the evidential facts as well as procedural matters.

 

[cityzen81]

that's a very interesting read, particularly the 10 year battle through the ECHR, and deferment of sanctions until such time as due process is complete. That was a fairly simple case too, involving 1 man and a (with respect) minor club in a minor league.

Our situation is obviously more complex and has significantly greater implications.

I fucking hate the guy but one paragraph stuck out to me which I never really thought about but would have to agree with

"There is no guarantee City will be granted a suspension of their ban when they apply for it in the coming days at the same time as any appeal. The decision - made by a Cas official - will be based on an assessment of the merits of City's appeal, so this initial decision will give a strong indication of their prospects."

 

[BlueAnorak]

But he wasn't smart enough to have sensitive financial conversations on a secure encrypted system as happens in major organisations across the world and even in small local authorities who handle residents' confidential financial data but not on an open email system. We can all agreee that we have been stitched up by UEFA but this whole farce has been a failure of management.

Undoubtably. Business managagement fails across the world because they do not understand IT. Indeed, I can count the number of senior execs I have met that understand IT on two fingers (and I have met rather a lot over the last 25 years).

 

[Gordyola]

Exactly, having gone back and watched and read the evidence you are right. The money has come from AD revenues so while not directly funded by SM he and his assets (ADUG) have been benefactors of this and have used it to their advantage. They have breached FFP on a technicality. What City are appealing here is that UEFA would not listen to any evidence and had reached a punishment before the investigation began. If they are successful in this appeal they will have their sanction reduced but not removed. They are guilty on a technicality whether we like it or not and have made a huge error of judgment and have deliberately played UEFA's system. FFP is unfair as it ensures that world football is dominated by certain clubs.

Their own ignorance and contempt in which they hold UEFA has put us in a right mess. I just can't believe that our owners have been so stupid as to have these type of conversations by unencrypted email that could easily be hacked. Unbelievable.

Can you say where the evidence is as UEFA have said it won't be released before the CAS verdict

Could you also clarify the technicality that the club breached

If the evidence that UEFA didn't examine shows that City are innocent of all charges CAS WILL rule in Citys favour

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

It is traceable though that's the problem the leaked emails prove that.

Traceable to Mansour? How?

 

[Ric]

This is well worth a read:
https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-manchester-city-uefa-go-to-war/

 

[badaz52]

I not having that, they would have known the 'rules', its more how the rules have been applied

That's what I mean, they don't like or agree with UEFA rules because it stops them from doing what they want to do so choose to be ignorant towards them and trying to use technicalities to avoid being caught out except they have been caught out this time.

 

[jamesha]

Am I missing something? I don't know anything about Syed other than him being fairly handy at the old whiff whaff, but how does any of what you posted preclude him from potentially being racist?

It was the description of Syed as a "middle class white man talking to an audience of 99% middle class white men and women" that I was challenging. Agree that his ethnic origin does not mean that he cannot not hold racist views but the statement in bold is wrong.

 

[SidJames]

I have faith in the owners at our Club.

The accusations that we have acted like Cowboys dont cut it with me,it is simply an MSM smear campaign.

Our owners are Billionaire businessmen with interests all over the Globe.

They have the best lawyers, and accountants, money can buy.

Based on what i have read in the News and from informative posters on this forum.The whole UEFA case was based on stolen,extremely contentious emails.Said emails they are not even sure who the recipient was,seeing as "HH" could have been a whole number of people in the Country.

UEFA interpreted the emails as conclusive proof of an FFP violation.Even though UEFA were not 100% who the fuck "HH" really is.And they had no idea in what context said emails were sent,they could have been part of a much larger conversation.

To cover for the glaring discrepancies UEFA charges us with failing to assist their investigation.reason being Manchester City FC would only send UEFA proof of our innocence, rather than the smoking Gun they wanted.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Both City and UEFA get to pick one sitting judge each on a panel of three.

It will come down to who the 'independent' is.

It will be whoever UEFA pay for it to be.

Seriously though, there seems little point in picking one each. They’re obviously going to side with whoever picked them... that’s why they are picking them! Having just one ‘independent’ opens it up for corruption. But I suppose that’s how they like it.

Should be 3 picks by CAS.

Hence why this wont stop at the CAS hearing.

You can see what will happen at the CAS - reduced 1 year ban, reduced fine. UEFA's get out clause in the eyes of the media/cartel clubs

Thing is we cannot and should not accept, and if the supposed Ceferin attendance back in November is anything to go by, then we will not accept something that admits we are wrongly guilty

This has come to a pivotal point now with UEFA's action, a point where we have said enough is enough. We take any reduced punishment and fine and you can bet your last £1 coin that in the future UEFA will again try to punish our club/owner and extract monies in terms of a fine etc....

We have categorically stated no wrong-doing

 

[mayo31]

That's what I mean, they don't like or agree with UEFA rules because it stops them from doing what they want to do so choose to be ignorant towards them and trying to use technicalities to avoid being caught out except they have been caught out this time.

So ignored them rather than be ignorant of them

 

[tonea2003]

If CAS are ruling on the UEFA due diligence and process, failing to read our compiled evidence etc and find them guilty, then surely they must fully overturn? If it’s not about FFP itself, that will go to an actual court, likely Switzerland.

It’s black and white this, the more I think about it. If they’ve botched their own investigation work then CAS have to throw this away. How could they possibly reduce the punishment if they rule in our favour?

It has to be all or nothing, surely?

that's the way i see it too mate, they haven't followed due process so CAS should throw it out, which would normally mean a new investigation if they so wish, but the problem with that is the 5yr statute of limitations has now well passed

but of course with uefa anything could happen

 

[FrankSwift1]

This has been raised on numerous occasions since Friday and it does have a degree of validity. Firstly we don't know if a deal was offered and if so what it entailed. Clearly if such a deale existed the club felt obliged to reject it. To say they made a "huge strategic error" is a sweeping statement unless you have knowledge the rest of us don't. My belief is rather than being offered a way out we we presented with no option but to go nuclear with them. My only concern about all this is that they have a lot more evidence of wrong doing than what has already entered the public domain if not they will pay dearly for any financial and reputational damage they may have or will cause us.

All fair points.

Im placing faith in Preswitch blue and Sam Lee in the Athletic who have both suggested we were offered a reasonable way out but we didnt accept.

You're point about the deal not being acceptable makes sense but then if you follow that through -then UEFA expect city will reject the offer and they will us ban us for 2 years. To force this situation they must have some confidence that their position will hold up ar CAS. A loss for UEFA would almost be as disastrous as for City.

As nothing is in the public domain its speculation at the moment. Will be interesting to see how this all unfolds.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Second worst combover of the 1980's.

Who was the worst? Bobby Charlton?

 

[SWP's back]

If I was being a cynic, I might think that a fair few cancelled subscriptions from City fans over the weekend urgently necessitated a fairly pro-City piece on their platform.

Yeah I cancelled after that hatchet job was emailed out to me as well.

 

[inbetween]

...all the indications are that CFG won't accept anything...reduction in the length of ban, removal of the ban but still a fine...other than a complete removal of all sanctions. They obviously feel that evidence has been ignored - maybe something like later emails that supersede the hacked ones that have been treated as evidence - so in effect an email was sent stating 'you sponsor us for £60 mill, but you only pay us £8 mill and HRH will pay the rest', but later an email was pinged saying along the lines of 'having given the matter further thought, we're not proceeding on those lines'.

That's why I'm hoping that they're so confident... and not because of a load of whataboutery about what other clubs with stronger links to uefa have been up to. If it is the latter, then whilst we may embarrass uefa and the clubs involved, we'll get slapped senseless whilst the authorities shout 'they're not under investigation, you are'.

Ideally we'll have evidence that contradicts the hacked emails AND evidence of the underhanded behaviour of other clubs as well.

Hacked emails can't be used as evidence so it is likely city will of provided evidence to counter it.

Don't forget the UEFA 'jury' isn't one of a criminal court, it's like asking a few blokes down the pub if someone is guilty.

CAS will be far more rigorous and critical of process rather than the result and it's the process that city will look to tear apart.

City can already demonstrate a poor process because UEFA 'judges' were leaking citys punishment before the court had started to sit......

In a regular court that case would be null and void.

 

[Dubai Blue]

It was the description of Syed as a "middle class white man talking to an audience of 99% middle class white men and women" that I was challenging. Agree that his ethnic origin does not mean that he cannot not hold racist views but the statement in bold is wrong.

Fair enough. However, you did specifically single out the racism accusation, so you can understand my confusion.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Hopefully somebody can clear this up for me?

Uefa have since stated their findings and how they reached a punishment won't be released until after CAS have now ruled?

How do CAS rule unless they are made privy to those findings, in what is bound to be a very public TV case, regardless of reporting restrictions?