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

[kaz7]

You stand corrected sometimes.... only after a protracted tantrum..... lol.

I beg to differ ,within a day is quite good for me :)

 

[waspish]

Bravado, in my interpretation here, was about our lack of awareness of what we were putting in writing at a very senior level.

That stuff should have been done in phone calls etc, especially since it seems our IT firewall was still under license from the Swales era.

Did these emails show everything or were some of them blacked out in parts by the hacker?

 

[Ric]

My view too. I’m not digging out the well respected posters who’ve promulgated the notion on here based on what they’ve been told, because they’re clearly posting in good faith, but us having a secret dossier of wrong doings that will bring our enemies to their knees when released? I just think it sounds like wishful thinking at best and complete bollocks at worst. Manna for the masses.

Yeah, can’t really see it myself either tbh. Presumably it wouldn’t have any impact on the CAS hearing anyway.

 

[GBrannan]

As far as I'm aware and stand to be corrected, UEFA instigated the case, investigated the case, judged on the case , and passed sentence. No matter who how high standing the judge was, he worked for UEFA.

They did and that seems like one angle we’re going to pursue.

However, there is though at least a degree of seemingly proper regulatory process from a pretty high standing law professional that has decided we’re guilty of the charges.

My main point is that there is, away from the briefings, a real hurdle for us to get over. Gill etc weren’t the ones eventually deciding our dossier didn’t stack up. Maybe we never submitted it in its entirety? If we did, there was a qualified guy of seemingly high standing and that shouldn’t be discounted. This is a forum for debate and I put that out to debate.

I, probably like any City fan on here, hope our key lawyers pick that case apart. All I wanted to do was say there is a case to answer, which is why we’re at CAS.

I really hope our guys are better than him and their lawyers... But UEFA will be hiring decent lawyers too.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

Bravado, in my interpretation here, was about our lack of awareness of what we were putting in writing at a very senior level.

That stuff should have been done in phone calls etc, especially since it seems our IT firewall was still under license from the Swales era.

Unfortunately we are the culprits in this shit show due to lack of due diligence. Allowing internal emails to be accessed is inexcusable imo.

 

[GBrannan]

The very same judge which was pissed with Uefa for letting Paris off the hook, so decided to make sure we were found guilty.

Maybe, maybe not.

Pretty subjective.

I’d expect a guy of that standing to be at least relatively rational in his his decisions.

We have a case to answer that’s going before a group of very qualified legal professionals. We’ve got together a bunch of what looks like the best to fight our corner. We’ll need them because we’re appealing against pretty strong findings, almost unprecedented.

I’m sure we’ve got some great points. I’m also pretty convinced UEFA do too. It’ll probably come down to a few core issues that are very grey in interpretation. I hope we’re on the right side of that grey.

Here’s hoping you’re right, or your sources are.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

Yeah, can’t really see it myself either tbh. Presumably it wouldn’t have any impact on the CAS hearing anyway.

If we had such dynamite then presumably the intended targets wouldn't be joining up to ensure we were sanctioned. It's a load of desperate bollocks unfortunately.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

You know after what I’ve seen over the last few years I don’t believe the Dippers haven’t broken the rules, it’s in the DNA of FSG to circumvent the rules & they’ve taken advantage of any faux outrage if accused. They have the traditional media & social media eating out of the palms of their hands.

we know they hacked & promoted for systematically cheating.

we know FSG have done it in baseball.

we know they organised & encouraged the attack on our coach to take advantage.

they organised a hate campaign against Sterling.

they have organised alliances with other clubs & written & met with UEFA & EPL to punish us.

they are allowed special interviews with perspective CEOs of EPL.

Now I don’t know what PB has but I’ve seen with my own eyes;

Extra ordinary refereeing decisions in UEFA & EPL.

Extra ordinary VAR decisions in EPL.

questionable relationships with Roma.

incredible energy levels with a small squad.

Board members on every committee.

Questionable financial reporting (FFP)

I just can’t believe there isn’t illegal activities that we know about in this cess-pit of football.

so I’ll say it again I want a shit storm of shame blowing over every condescending Dipper that I’ve had to listen to. I want them back in their box.

I’d love nothing more myself. I just don’t think a secret bombshell dossier assembled over however long (and presumably pre-dating Der Spiegelgate) is particularly plausible

 

[George Hannah]

......I’d expect a guy of that standing to be at least relatively rational in his his decisions....

This is almost always an unrealistic expectation about anyone in UEFA

 

[chesterbells]

Unfortunately we are the culprits in this shit show due to lack of due diligence. Allowing internal emails to be accessed is inexcusable imo.

It certainly seems like we haven’t always helped ourselves have we?

 

[GBrannan]

I think you need to look at the UEFA process with respect to FFP as you clearly are a little confused as to how it works You also need to catch up on the statements that City made along the way as to their dissatisfaction especially in context of the chief investigator You should also consider the time line and how the IC rushes their verdict to stay inside the 5 year time limit for reinvestigation of a previously agreed case
I collated lots of information and links here

https://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/threads/ffp-timeline-for-information.344822/

I think they’re points we’ll definitely contest. Those have been well documented points that we will contest. Maybe we put them in our dossier, maybe we didn’t. IF we did, and they didn’t get by a well established judge, then we might find ourselves in a trick position arguing them again.

I don’t know if we’re on the right side of those fences. Neither does anyone else at this stage.

What we were though is plain daft to be putting that stuff in emails in the first place. That’s why we are here. If we didn’t do that that, and those involved shouldn’t have, then we’d be fine.

I hope we are.

 

[George Hannah]

I think they’re points we’ll definitely contest. Those have been well documented points that we will contest. Maybe we put them in our dossier, maybe we didn’t. IF we did, and they didn’t get by a well established judge, then we might find ourselves in a trick position arguing them again.

I don’t know if we’re on the right side of those fences. Neither does anyone else at this stage.

What we were though is plain daft to be putting that stuff in emails in the first place. That’s why we are here. If we didn’t do that that, and those involved shouldn’t have, then we’d be fine.

I hope we are.

We could be as pure as the driven snow

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Maybe, maybe not.

Pretty subjective.

I’d expect a guy of that standing to be at least relatively rational in his his decisions.

We have a case to answer that’s going before a group of very qualified legal professionals. We’ve got together a bunch of what looks like the best to fight our corner. We’ll need them because we’re appealing against pretty strong findings, almost unprecedented.

I’m sure we’ve got some great points. I’m also pretty convinced UEFA do too. It’ll probably come down to a few core issues that are very grey in interpretation. I hope we’re on the right side of that grey.

Here’s hoping you’re right, or your sources are.

Can't hold lawyers in a higher regard. Besides, despite what his scope and remit was, if he was told "prescribe the appropriate punishment based on this evidence" then it's not exactly an open judgement.

 

[Ric]

They did and that seems like one angle we’re going to pursue.

However, there is though at least a degree of seemingly proper regulatory process from a pretty high standing law professional that has decided we’re guilty of the charges.

My main point is that there is, away from the briefings, a real hurdle for us to get over. Gill etc weren’t the ones eventually deciding our dossier didn’t stack up. Maybe we never submitted it in its entirety? If we did, there was a qualified guy of seemingly high standing and that shouldn’t be discounted. This is a forum for debate and I put that out to debate.

I, probably like any City fan on here, hope our key lawyers pick that case apart. All I wanted to do was say there is a case to answer, which is why we’re at CAS.

I really hope our guys are better than him and their lawyers... But UEFA will be hiring decent lawyers too.

My hope is that we didn’t fully comply with the investigation as we knew that they would find us guilty regardless, so have withheld evidence for the CAS hearing in pursuit of total exoneration. Might be wishful thinking, but who knows. Going to be fascinating to see how this plays out anyway, especially as the stakes are so high.

 

[GBrannan]

Did these emails show everything or were some of them blacked out in parts by the hacker?

I don’t know. We’ll find out in due course.

As others have said, if we disputed the accuracy of the content of the emails we’d have surely raised that by now.

It seems like we’ll be arguing the interpretation of those emails against our accounting methods as well as the various rules of UEFA regarding previous accounting periods, settlement agreements etc.

 

[GBrannan]

We could be as pure as the driven snow

Time will tell

 

[Ric]

I don’t know. We’ll find out in due course.

As others have said, if we disputed the accuracy of the content of the emails we’d have surely raised that by now.

It seems like we’ll be arguing the interpretation of those emails against our accounting methods as well as the various rules of UEFA regarding previous accounting periods, settlement agreements etc.

We’ve pointedly not disputed the content of the emails, but continually said that they’ve been taken out of context.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Unfortunately we are the culprits in this shit show due to lack of due diligence. Allowing internal emails to be accessed is inexcusable imo.

I don’t think you can be that hard on City, Pinto hacked far greater fish than us and if he wanted in nobody was stopping him.

When you look at this from a wider scale you see why we have been cautious in giving anybody our business details. We got done by the authorities because we didn’t want to supply full information to refute the allegations as, when we were asked to supply more detail back in 2014, our business model and transactions were basically handed over to our direct rivals via a member of a club only a few miles away.

Maybe, just maybe, the investigatory committee forced the issue with a huge punishment in order for us to prove our compliance to CAS by handing over the stuff that we withheld because it would give them more insight into our business model.

Whatever the case, we need to give the opposing arbiters as little information as possible to prove our case, otherwise, we end up giving the ECA Governors something to get their teeth into.

 

[GBrannan]

Can't hold lawyers in a higher regard. Besides, despite what his scope and remit was, if he was told "prescribe the appropriate punishment based on this evidence" then it's not exactly an open judgement.

Maybe.

From my limited understanding of CAS, it’s that sort of process they’re interested in.

Has the due process been followed etc.

My point the other day was really just that this is much more complex than is being portrayed here. There has been a level of highly qualified legal scrutiny paid to our case thus far. It really wasn’t Gill, Parry etc sat in a room thumbing through our documents and coming to a whimsical decision. Or, if was, they, at least allegedly, did so behind a highly qualified legal professional prepared to put his name on the sanction.

Now, why he did that could be, as one poster implied, because of previous cases and UEFA wanted to make a point. Or maybe he did it because our dossier isn’t what it’s cracked up to be. Or maybe he didn’t ever get our full dossier? I find that hard to believe though because why on earth would we want the continued damage to our reputation, players, managers etc beyond 2019? We wouldn’t. Even City can’t be that masochistic!

I hope we’ve got our stuff together and show UEFA up for what it is. But we’re, as it stands, up against a sanction from a body whose rules we signed up to, no matter how rubbish and skewed they are.

 

[M18CTID]

My hope is that we didn’t fully comply with the investigation as we knew that they would find us guilty regardless, so have withheld evidence for the CAS hearing in pursuit of total exoneration. Might be wishful thinking, but who knows. Going to be fascinating to see how this plays out anyway, especially as the stakes are so high.

Haven’t we got a dossier of evidence seemingly showing no wrong-doing which UEFA decided to ignore? If the club are telling the truth on that then surely that will show we’ve gone to substantial lengths to clear our name, but yeah, maybe we’ve got something else up our sleeve too in case that failed - I’ve seen a suggestion that we might present them with the Etihad accounts which will show the source of the funds didn’t come from our owner. Now that would be piss funny if we casually dropped that one in on the first morning of the appeal.