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

[Rammy Blue]

Apparently he has tweeted over 640,000 times during his Twitter tenure.

This would suggest..

A) A loner
B) Needs for recognition
C) Has no partner or sex life
D) Lives on his own
E) Narcissistic
F) Has no life
G) Needy
H) All of the above

I) Micro-penis

 

[kaz7]

Apparently he has tweeted over 640,000 times during his Twitter tenure.

This would suggest..

A) A loner
B) Needs for recognition
C) Has no partner or sex life
D) Lives on his own
E) Narcissistic
F) Has no life
G) Needy
H) All of the above

Thats me on here lol

 

[Bluemanc100]

I think FFP was a conspiracy directed against only us from the start.

UEFA got us to commit to a system all our enemies were moderating.

One they got us to sign up to FFP they began their objective of trying to destroy us.

Forensically going over all our sponsor revenue looking for discrepancies.

I hope we take this all the way to the very top.

I believe it was actually designed to stop Chelsea but they and Abramhovic sneaked in the door before the rules went live.. overnight he became an advocate (as he was then part of the clique)

 

[domalino]

"They relied more on out of context stolen emails than all the other evidence that we provided about what actually happened".
​

I think that really is the smoking gun.

We already know at least 1 of the emails has discrepancies to what actually happened. People discussing something happening isnt proof of something actually having happened.

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

would love for someone to give rob harris a slap. hopefully the club ban the arse

 

[mcfcphil]

Apparently he has tweeted over 640,000 times during his Twitter tenure.

This would suggest..

A) A loner
B) Needs for recognition
C) Has no partner or sex life
D) Lives on his own
E) Narcissistic
F) Has no life
G) Needy
H) All of the above

To spend that much time on social media simply can't be good for anyone, no matter your job or reason for doing so.
Your grasp on the real world must be seriously compromised if you spend so little time engaging with real people.

 

[sir baconface]

I’ve actually been thinking about this myself.

We were cleared and signed off by UEFA from 2013-14 up to 2015-16 for complying with FFP in that period. But it was complying with FFP in respect of not incurring losses in that time period.

UEFA say they have “evidence” that we have gone against FFP regulations in that time period in another way than not incurring losses... City say that can’t be looked at as we were already signed off by UEFA for that time period but are City right? Were were we signed off for all FFP related issues or just compliance with not incurring losses?

Can that case be re-opened if it’s a different kind of FFP rule breaks?

City also say the “evidence” has been illegally obtained and that what the “evidence” shows is not the actual reality... this may be true, but can UEFA still open up investigations into it?

Under normal circumstances I imagine the time period can’t be re-opened, having previously been given the green light. Presumably - if UEFA can prove misrepresentation or fraud - it would be a different ball game.

If our owner did make good the sponsorship gap, as UEFA appear to maintain, they would argue that Etihad are actually a related party. That means sponsorship should have been tested under the market fairness rule and doubtless capped at a much lower amount. In such a case our operating losses would have been higher and hence in breach of FFP.

So the crux of the issue remains this: who made up Etihad’s shortfall? Was it the state government, in which case we are hopefully in the clear, or was it Sheikh Mansour/ADUG, in which case things might be tougher? That’s assuming all other things being equal, of course, including time bars and other technicalities.

In effect I think Conn is saying that, if we did get turned over on the above point, then our P & L would be impacted from 2016 onward. That would result in further financial breaches. (It would not fall offside of the 5-year rule.)

As a side issue, if we do win on this point, we’re effectively admitting to the court of football opinion that we are indeed oil state sponsored :-(

 

[Shirley]

Apparently he has tweeted over 640,000 times during his Twitter tenure.

This would suggest..

A) A loner
B) Needs for recognition
C) Has no partner or sex life
D) Lives on his own
E) Narcissistic
F) Has no life
G) Needy
H) All of the above

A prolific wanker

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Respect Souness there !

Not what you expect from all three, but in fairness, Souness has a much more free reign to express his opinion on the Irish Stations than he does in the UK.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Interesting take away too that it would appear on the face of it that UEFA did purely use the context of the stolen/hacked emails as their only evidence for the ban.

As quite a few of us have said before on this thread over last few days, surely it can’t be that simple?