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.
BlueBrain said:
I agree with Ric let’s just wait and see. People have been confident in many aspects in the past and got it incredibly wrong. A CAS case can easily go bad. If it was as simple as PB is suggesting this would’ve got thrown out at CAS1

my personal belief though is the whole thing is a smear campaign to damage city’s rep. That job is done. Even if we get found not guilty and CAS throw the case out, people will still call city cheats, that’s the truth. This impacts the club in attracting future fans, future sponsors and most importantly future players. The damage is irreversible done. I have had people tell me even if we win at CAS that we’re still cheating scum and it’s only because expensive lawyers got us out of it on some technicality.

The only way this damage gets undone is if city actually go for the jugular and counter-sue for damages and get money back. But I just can’t see the club go down that path, we never have
Click to expand...

You're right in that the damage will never be undone but the only way to counter the damage is to keep on winning trophies, and that starts tomorrow. If we don't win anything then nobody talks about us. What was that Oscar Wilde quote again?.........
 
domalino said:
It does prove it beyond sensible amounts of doubt. It's an internal document from after the fact stating the sponsorship was covered by the Executive Council.
Click to expand...

I can't see anything in the document relating to sponsorship(?) but I'm not disagreeing with you.
It does appear to confirm that Etihad is massively supported by the government, that shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone though as Etihad is acting a a major promotional vehicle for the country and its tourism ambitions. Pretty clear that Abu Dhabi wants to replicate the success that Dubai (and Emirates) enjoy.

If the Abu Dhabi government is going to prop up the airline to the tune of several billion then it stands to reason that £60m sponsorship would hardy even register.

The FFP charges alledging our owner is pushing money in to City via back door sponsorship are completely misinterpreting the bigger picture.
  • The Abu Dhabi government has pumped billions into Etihad to promote the country and its fledgling tourist industry
  • Advertising is a key part of that strategy, everyone has heard of Dubai and Emirates and Abu Dhabi wants to emulate that success
  • Emirates sponsor AC Milan, Real Madrid, Arsenal FC, SL Benfica, Hamburger SV, Paris Saint-Germain, and Olympiacos FC and the FA cup ( or at least they did in 2016, can't be arsed looking any closer)
  • Etihad sponsor Man City
  • The sponsorship has fucking well worked ! City have won 4 PL titles, 2 FA cups, [edit] Five League Cups and have competed in the CL every fucking year - an advertising executive couldn't wish for better (well maybe add a CL win but cross fingers on that one)
  • Etihad isn't there to promote Man City, Man City are there to promote Etihad
  • (Edit:) The sponsorship has been assessed as FAIR VALUE by UEFA itself!
The Etihad sponsorship is absolutely NOT a mechanism to artificially boost Man City's revenue its a vehicle to promote Abu Dhabi. This is geo-politics at work, nothing to do with football other than football providing the global exposure needed.

It's fuck all to do with UEFA and I'm staggered that the FFP narrative is still going.
 
Last edited:
VOOMER said:
It says he isnt a blue.
Click to expand...


It crossed my mind, anyone who knows how our owners work should know they don't air their (perceived dirty or otherwise) laundry in public, and the only way to deal with a smear campaign is to go about your business quietly and with dignity, you find out who's really on your side then.
 
BlueBrain said:
I agree with Ric let’s just wait and see. People have been confident in many aspects in the past and got it incredibly wrong. A CAS case can easily go bad. If it was as simple as PB is suggesting this would’ve got thrown out at CAS1

my personal belief though is the whole thing is a smear campaign to damage city’s rep. That job is done. Even if we get found not guilty and CAS throw the case out, people will still call city cheats, that’s the truth. This impacts the club in attracting future fans, future sponsors and most importantly future players. The damage is irreversible done. I have had people tell me even if we win at CAS that we’re still cheating scum and it’s only because expensive lawyers got us out of it on some technicality.

The only way this damage gets undone is if city actually go for the jugular and counter-sue for damages and get money back. But I just can’t see the club go down that path, we never have
Click to expand...
We were in the third tier of English football 21 years ago, and on Wednesday we deservedly won at the Bernabéu. Why would you think anything was uncontrovertibly irreversible?
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
That’s not strictly true. No more than the statutory maximum that was in situ at the time can be imposed (ECHR Article 7) but (despite what Sun and Mail readers would have everyone believe) sentences for sexual offences have gone through the roof in the last 30 years, so someone being found guilty of historical sexual offences from, say, the 1980’s will be subject to a far tougher sentence today than they would have been if they’d been convicted at the time. Up to three to four times as much, up to that statutory maximum, isn’t unusual.

Whether that’s unjust depends on the offence imo. A bit of non-consensual groping of an adult in a public place should not be dealt with more harshly than it was at the time imo as it was much less socially unacceptable a generation ago, whereas anything that involves kids or rape has never been ok in post-industrial times and should therefore be punished as per today. I think it’s wrong to impose our own sense of morality upon people who have previously faltered in a relatively minor sense - although as it’s a largely pragmatic view, as a philosophical position I’m not entirely sure I’m on totally solid ground as it’s arguably philosophically inconsistent.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you make sense
 
Blue Bruce said:
By the same person too
Click to expand...

Unfair Colin is not known for spreading rumours he will only have posted the information in good faith to ease others concern
The information in 2014 was correct, at the time, backed up with evidence and he has explained
numerous times what happened I for one take it as it is intended, information only, and appreciate him letting us know. I understand that it’s only from one side and the judges will make their decision, having considered all the evidence. I have faith that they will do it impartial
 
Last edited:
People, stop worrying about "reputation"! First of all, we haven't had one for 40 years. People either laugh at us or don't care, and it's been like that as far back as I can remember. I've never even heard anyone say "City? They're my second club!". If we've had a reputation, it's surely not been a good one!

Second, anyone remember all the Juventus scandals? Drugs, doping, bribery and match fixing! They're still in it. Does anyone care? No. Same with AC Milan and a bunch of other Italian clubs. Porto of Portugal too. No one cares! "Reputation" is overvalued!
 
KS55 said:
You are all in the dark. The real story goes back to 1963 when the Alexander family arranged the assassination of JFK. Marilyn Monroe was having an affair with Bert Trautmann....the rest is history, but not ours obvs as we don't have any.
Click to expand...
This from a genuine ITK great work thanks for sharing
 
Gordyola said:
Unfair Colin is not know for spreading rumours he will only have posted the information in good faith to ease others concern
The information in 2014 was correct, at the time, backed up with evidence and he has explained
numerous times what happened I for one take it as it is intended, information only, and appreciate him letting us know. I understand that it’s only from one side and the judges will make their decision, having considered all the evidence. I have faith that they will do it impartial
Click to expand...
He's just a troll, probably banned previously so don't give him the oxygen he craves.

Read this story from yesterday. UEFA haven't spoken to Pinto, which I think backs up my story.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-prison-with-hard-drive-passwords-in-his-head
 
Wow! Some people are really trawling through this thread. I've just had a like for a post on page 2161, unbelievable!
 
domalino said:
Repeating this over and over again doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...
You need to do some clear thinking about this D. The whole UEFA case was launched because of - and is predicated upon - the hacked/stolen DS emails. PB reinforced this yesterday despite some concerns expressed by others on here that in that case UEFA must have something else on us. Otherwise the Adjudicatory Chamber wouldn't have been so incompetent as to allow the sanction to be imposed on the basis of what is currently in the public domain. They clearly have to prove those emails show we broke their rules and our case is that they do not and misrepresent the true situation that we are totally innocent. Our evidence will show that they have been taken out of their meaningful context and manipulated to fit a false and deliberately damaging narrative. Further, we will show that UEFA's actions are driven by their controlling group of elite clubs who are the principal casualties of our successful business model on the pitch. Hopefully we will also contest the first FFP penalty on the grounds that UEFA unfairly changed the toolkit.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top