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

[blueinsa]

They won't be revealing their reasons to the press but of course they will have to in submissions to CAS both before and during any hearings. These will not be in the public domain before CAS's decision is reached.

You mean Gill wont be telling Stone?

 

[lancs blue]

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?

UEFA will have to release that evidence to CAS, I read their statement as meaning there will be no public disclosure until the CAS verdict is announced.

 

[dario2739]

I repeat how can you be sure we were offered a viable way out? The people who may be wrongly accused probably consider it a lot more important than been guilty of a technical breach.Also we can't easily quantify the damage in the medium to long term. If we get back into Europe I would suggest it would be limited. Most of those sneering bastards in the press running us down at present hate us anyway as do a lot of others in football nationally and internationally our brand has and will always suffer as a result.

I feel we may (and should) persue damages when the dust clears

 

[blue ranger]

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.

Don’t think it works entirely like that, and I’m not an expert. I think we both get a chance to pick from a list.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

If / when City appeal, could take months for the hearing - if so I presume City cant be banned next season if the appeal hasnt started?

 

[BlueAnorak]

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."

Can UEFA afford to give us around £450m + legal fees if they play hardball and lose? (Loss of revenue + damages)

 

[badaz52]

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.

Hacked emails can be used as evidence, even in a court they can if they are relevant to the investigation except UEFA isn't a court so that doesn't matter.

 

[mcs]

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.

The case will come down to what evidence UEFA has been able to compile to supplement the leaked emails. If its the leaked emails and tumbleweed (which is what City are hedging), then I reckon we will give 'em an absolute bath in CAS - after all we are in a position of power in all this, in terms of having access to 'context documents' that UEFA simply has no jurisdiction to get - even with whatever information gathering powers they have under FFP. If UEFA has done the hard yards, corroborated what is implied by the dirty emails through other evidence - then we are up a creek most likely, and deservedly so if other evidence can support their arguments to show we 'misled them' about the source of funding underlying sponsorship (not the very clearly chosen words in UEFAs statmeent - this is not about 'overvaluing' our sponsorships, but 'overstating' them - which to me suggests a focus on the source of the funds in the case of UEFA, not the absolute quantum (which was what got us the first time around)


But if UEFA has been bluffing, and the hacked emails are basically it, then if our lawyers are worth anything like what we will pay them, then we will have them over a barrel.

Its a fascinating example of John Nash 'game theory' at play. Lots of brikmanship, lots of gamesmanship, lots of strategy based on 'i think they know this, or think this, or have this'. It seems likely one party or the other will take a heavy beating if it is all played out either in CAS or later on in the courts. Hence my view is that the most likely outcome of CAS is a negotiated settlement with a much lower punishment.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Who was the worst? Bobby Charlton?

Our erstwhile club chairman perhaps...

 

[mcs]

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?

They mena it won't be released pubilcly. CAS will have access to the information.

 

[CC1]

After the events of the last few days I cant help but think that City have made a huge strategic error. Apparently we were offered a way out of this with a technical breach and small fine. (Similar to the Fifa case). By refusing to negotiate it seems we have pushed UEFA to go nuclear with us.

Even if the ban is overturned by Cas this doesnt clear us and its my understanding we have to carry the fight on in Swiss courts(?).

Even if we are eventually cleared which is far from certain the reputational damage of the ban and potential future case with UEFA is enormous. Pretty much the whole footballing world has heard Manchester City are cheats for the last few days and will narative will continue and wont stop even if we win the case. It will turn to, 'well what did you expect when they can buy the bsst lawyers'

Wouldn't it have been sensible to take the fine and carry on as normal. Who would care apart from Johny from Liverpool on twitter.

By taking this risk we have potentially affected our ability to compete for the next 3 4 years but also will forever be known as cheats. We can all argue with internet warriors till we are blue in the face but the label will surely affect out ability to attract commercial sponsorship and grow our fan base in the developing football markets such as India, China and the US.

All supposition. We certainly don’t know that UEFA offered us a deal which was just a small fine!! Think that’s wishful thinking.

 

[Gordyola]

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.

According to UEFA something the club deny

 

[cibaman]

Maybe we did show the evidence in the 200 page document that UEFA chose to ignore hence we are now saying we have irrefutable evidence but we can't say what it is due to the ongoing process and the confidentiality of it all. After all we can't accuse UEFA of leaking like a sieve and then do the same

I think we could. Why wouldn’t we disclose irrefutable evidence if it’s being ignored and we’re being leaked about?

But I was also referring to our public stance before UEFA opened the investigation. We said the reports were misleading, inaccurate and taken out of context. That being so, the obvious course of action was to invite a sympathetic journo such as samuels to bring along a forensic accountant and take them through the emails and the audit trails.

It seems to me that we’re putting all our eggs in the basket of the emails being obtained illegally. Fine if we win.

 

[cityzen81]

Can UEFA afford to give us around £450m + legal fees if they play hardball and lose? (Loss of revenue + damages)

It wont be up to UEFA to suspend the ban its up CAS. What the certin has said which in all honesty is true is "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."

So basically if the ban is not suspended CAS do not think we have a good case/appeal. If they do suspend the ban it would then appear we are on the front foot and what happens then is anyones guess.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

"Rui Pinto will stand trial on 93 charges related to hacking, computer sabotage, illegitimate access, violation of correspondence and attempted extortion."

https://digit.fyi/portuguese-hacker-stands-trial-over-football-leaks/

I think that's an old story and last time I checked (the court documents are online somewhere) none of the charges relate to City so it's also inaccurate. It's probably a freelance trying to cash in on the back of the City story by recycling this angle. No doubt the idiots in the UK tabloids will just re-publish it as fresh news without checking though. Mind you most of them have ignored the Pinto dimension up to now because it doesn't help their anti-City narrative. It has been all over the Portugese and US media for a few weeks.

 

[mcs]

I feel we may (and should) persue damages when the dust clears

No doubt at all we will take UEFA to the cleaners if we are fully exonerated. If its a settlement, a substantial reduction in the fine or ban will be our 'damages'.

 

[Roachy]

If / when City appeal, could take months for the hearing - if so I presume City cant be banned next season if the appeal hasnt started?

City have appealed to CAS today for a suspension of the sanction.

 

[badaz52]

Please could you reference your evidence?

I don't want to link anything here but you can find the leaks online if you look for them including the Der spiegel article, some pretty compelling stuff. In a nutshell, most of City's sponsors are either Government owned or Government backed. SM is part of that government and chairs many of them himself. In short whenever City have had a shortfall they have been able to siphon money from other companies and inject it into the club, intentionally circumventing UEFA FFP rules and changing dates to suit to make it look like they didn't have a deficit. They are guilty on a technicality and if you look carefully the Club aren't even denying their guilt they are just not happy about the process.

 

[cibaman]

If / when City appeal, could take months for the hearing - if so I presume City cant be banned next season if the appeal hasnt started?

Its been reported that they’re pressing for the case to be dealt with before July. Before the europa league starts.

 

[nmc]

From Der-Spiegel leaked email analysis
"As we discussed, the annual direct obligation for Aabar is GBP 3 million," Pearce wrote. "The remaining 12 million GBP requirement will come from alternative sources provided by His Highness."

With just a single sentence, Pearce confirmed the accusations that his club had repeatedly, indignantly rejected: Namely, that His Highness, Sheikh Mansour, paid a portion of the sponsoring money himself!

Der-Spiegel have clearly assumed that His Highness is Sheikh Mansour

Pearce, highly experienced Abu Dhabi protocol, won's have made a simple mistake as BlueAnorak said above doing so leads to being bollocked

I’m struggling with this and hope @Prestwich_Blue might have a view. On the face of it this looks like this Der Spiegel assumption being swallowed hook, line and sinker by our opponents and a simple misunderstanding has seen us fined potentially £200k. However, from memory Tabas was harping on about state funding so I wonder whether UEFA give a damn about whether the money has come from Sheikh Mansour or the EC because to them it feels like financial doping or an underhand process. I just struggle to see how it could be as simple a misunderstanding as this unless our rivals are blind with rage but there are some serious legal eagles within Uefa - so I just think the issue must be deeper than this. Are uefa that naive or that determined to destroy us?