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

[kaz7]

Nah. @karen7 is in red.....................she's a scarlet woman, I'll wager.

blue dress ,red undies,that should sort it lol

 

[Proy]

We don't know what the board has to offer to CAS. I do hope that they have been truthful to UEFA, and not economical with the truth, which is why they have banned us for 2yrs.

Even if we were economical with the truth, who gives a fuck? I know I certainly don't. In fact I embrace it.

We all know why FFP was created. We all know that goal posts were moved the first time, thus ensuring we 'failed' the audit.

Our owners should be able to invest as they see fit.

That is not to say there shouldn't be governance though, there has to be a set of rules that ensure we don't see clubs getting themselves in all sorts of shit ala Leeds, I am fully supportive of that type of process.

What I'm not supportive of is a set of rules created by a bunch of bent bastards with the sole purpose of protecting their elitism by stopping us being a prolonged and consistent threat to it.

The best possible outcome is that UEFA are instructed (and I don't believe this can happen through CAS, although I may be wrong) to revise their finicial policy so that it is actually 'fair'.

If they did this properly, then a large number of that G14 would have some serious problems.

UEFA are just a road block. There are a group of clubs who are itching to create their own super League and I suspect we want in, but those said clubs have gone to task with us now in a big way and I don't think that road can be repaired. In fact it's gone in completely the opposite direction.

This is a geopolitical power play. The very definition of football politics.

I am not entirely sure where we stand in the shit storm but it looks like we want some part of a breakaway.

 

[Proy]

Where have I ever said the media is not perverse?

Nobody has a lower opinion of certain sections of the media than me. The only difference is I think their behaviour is not unique to City but contemptible to anyone they can possibly attack.

Also I do not use a broad brush to categorise everybody in the media, hence I doubt everybody is conspiring against us. Sadly some people cannot see that you can doubt an agenda by the ‘media’ but still dislike large sections of them.

You'd need to define an agenda.

I think that word is thrown around loosely on here and creates a lot of division.

Not every single media outlet is out to get us, however that makes it no less pertinent. There are still more than enough who have got on this bandwagon which has the sole purpose of smeering us. Quite a few of those journalists, in my opinion, will be on the Qatar payroll. That type of organised process filters down into those who don't understand it so they just shout it and repeat it ad nauseam. It's very easy for the truth to become lost in this type of situation.

So whilst it may not quantify an agenda, there is still ample evidence that there is Ill feeling toward us.

You seem as though you are using the wording of agenda to discredit the argument.

I think the reality is that you don't believe there is anything happening and that in fact quite a few blues are a little paranoid.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Proy]

The ownership and management team have done fantastic things for the club and city in the past 12 years but if they pushed the boundaries (unfair rules if you want) too far and tried to cover it up from everyone (including us) they have put the clubs reputation on the line and ultimately its us the fans that it impacts in the long run.

The clubs reputation in front of the people we are dealing with is already damaged beyond repair. It really doesn't fucking matter at this point.

You need to start thinking bigger than us being 'dishonest' and challenge yourself to a different thought train, i.e, we absolutely should stand up to corruption. Because that's what it is.

You have a really innocent and frankly black and white point of view of it.

There was an analogy of the Nazis and Hitler used. Whilst that resulted in mass murder and naturally could never be literally compared, the principle is absolutely the same.

If we use your logic on that example, then Hitler would be still be in power because all those who stood the fuck up and challenged him were not being 'honest' to his rules/dictatorship.

 

[Proy]

The central question with our alleged breach is does it matter where Etihad and the other two Abu Dhabi-based sponsors got their money from? And the answer is, as I've shown, yes it could well matter, depending on the circumstances. But my interpretation of the FFP rules is that if Sheikh Mansour didn't pay that money, then we haven't broken any rules and, even if he did, we might not have.

It is absolutely the central question.

Let's say we did bend the truth in that £40 million of the 50 wasnt all from Etihad for example, then yes we have 'contravened' a part of their FFP. It was fair market value at the time so that money was coming into the business regardless, so does it really matter if Mansour made up the difference?

Now it is open to interpretation so my question is this:

Can the CAS realign UEFAs audit process/FFP policy if they deem it unreasonable?

Because that is the case here. Let's assume we did contravene their regulation.

Does a ban stick on the back of that alone or can the CAS instruct UEFA to adapt their policy, and if not, where do we potentially go after as a matter of escalation?

 

[Hart of the Matter]

All any of this proves to me is what a shithouse business professional football is.
I agree with PB’s summary that we are guilty of nothing. Because the whole thing is corrupt and the rules are skewed (particularly against us)

As such and in the present circumstances whereby I honestly have not missed football, I genuinely don’t know what outcome from CAS would actually satisfy me.

My current thinking hasn’t changed, I really feel like I’m done with football, in it’s present form.

I don’t feel the outcome I would fantasise about is possible. I think there is too much stacked against us in the overall game, but I do live in hope.

How I would love to see the tide turn.
I don’t even want to see City be a part of this corrupt money-centric business but that, I fear is being just naive.

Like I said. I truly don’t know what would satisfy me at this stage.

I agree with your pessemism. VAR has killed the game on the field for me and the corruption of the game off the field is heart breaking. Putting our hearts into a situation where natural justice is irrelevant and kangaroo courts prevail is soul destroying. In addition, just watching the soulless, ghoulish spectacle of the press and politicians need to restart the game in empty stadiums convinces me that the spirit of football is dead.

As for City?
We are already fucked in the court of public opinion. Not sure how much I care about that. But the more we fight the deeper the hole gets.

My god i want to see those fuckers in the media taken down big style, including the BBC. But if certain clubs can get away with hacking, smashing up busses and get exclusive access to appoint the bosses (all without a ripple in the media), then i am out. For the sake of my own health.

Football is fucked to the core and City (as us fans) are the sacrificial lambs.

I will always follow City and rile against the dishonesty but perhaps when chatting to strangers who ask which club I follow i will simply say " i dont really follow football" (which will in essence, be true).

 

[GaudinoMotors]

I agree with your pessemism. VAR has killed the game on the field for me and the corruption of the game off the field is heart breaking. Putting our hearts into a situation where natural justice is irrelevant and kangaroo courts prevail is soul destroying. In addition, just watching the soulless, ghoulish spectacle of the press and politicians need to restart the game in empty stadiums convinces me that the spirit of football is dead.

As for City?
We are already fucked in the court of public opinion. Not sure how much I care about that. But the more we fight the deeper the hole gets.

My god i want to see those fuckers in the media taken down big style, including the BBC. But if certain clubs can get away with hacking, smashing up busses and get exclusive access to appoint the bosses (all without a ripple in the media), then i am out. For the sake of my own health.

Football is fucked to the core and City (as us fans) are the sacrificial lambs.

I will always follow City and rile against the dishonesty but perhaps when chatting to strangers who ask which club I follow i will simply say " i dont really follow football" (which will in essence, be true).

But always remember the vindictive rules being purposefully used to intimidate and destroy one club "is nothing like nazi Germany."
The rules are the rules.

 

[waspish]

But always remember the vindictive rules being purposefully used to intimidate and destroy one club "is nothing like nazi Germany."
The rules are the rules.

Yep those rules we never broke.

 

[Franny's toilet roll]

Sorry to pick up on your post particularly but there's a general point I wanted to make so be assured I'm not having a go at you here.

People are talking about us being "guilty". That's nonsense. We haven't killed or assaulted anyone, we haven't stolen anything. We haven't broken any laws at all in fact. CAS won't find us "guilty" or "innocent". What we've allegedly done is contravene some rules. I can't even find evidence of how these rules were accepted by the majority as all I can see is that a body appointed by UEFA, the Club Financial Control Panel, came up with the rules, which were endorsed by the Executive Committee. So anyone who also says "We signed up to them" is also wrong. They were imposed on UEFA associations whether they liked them or not as far as I can see.

The thing with rules and laws, particularly financial ones, is that they're always open to interpretation. That's why we have commercial courts, tax tribunals, employment tribunals etc. Because when sorting out tax, an acountant may take one view and HMRC an opposing one. It's about interpretation and that often involves deciding what the spirit of the rule was. It's also about what you think you can legally get away with.

The central question with our alleged breach is does it matter where Etihad and the other two Abu Dhabi-based sponsors got their money from? And the answer is, as I've shown, yes it could well matter, depending on the circumstances. But my interpretation of the FFP rules is that if Sheikh Mansour didn't pay that money, then we haven't broken any rules and, even if he did, we might not have.

I assume that UEFA's interpretation of the Der Spiegel stories will be one of our key lines of defence (although it might not be) with us arguing they were wrong and we can show that quite categorically. People are also talking about false accounting, which is ridiculous. If Etihad gave us £50m and we recorded that as £50m sponsorship then we've done things quite correctly. If, on the other hand, Etihad gave us £10m and Sheikh Mansour gave us the other £40m, which we recorded as being fom Etihad, then we could have been seen to have misreported the income. but I'm pretty confident we did things by the book.

So please can we not talk about us being "guilty" and this being some sort of court case that will establish our guilt or innocence. It will, I believe, establish if UEFA's interpretation and implementation of its own processes and procedures was correct and whether they had any genuine grounds for re-opening our case.

Think we're being a bit precious here, with objections to the use of 'guilty or innocent' . We all know we haven't killed , maimed or slaughtered anyone, that accusation is aimed at our 'alleged' owners . Our club is,however, plying its trade under the governance of several footballing bodies and their associated rules and procedures. We have been found 'guilty' of breaching those rules in the past and have coughed up a few £million in 'fines'. There's nothing wrong with using this terminology. We now find ourselves back in an Appeal Court because they've had another bite at the cherry due to the discovery of other alleged transgressions. I don't attempt to understand fully the accounting rules and regs, i bow to your superior knowledge on this one and i am grateful for your posts and updates. I'm only interested in knowing whether we get off, or the punishment stands or perhaps lessened in some way . The label i don't want for our club is Cheat! so only one outcome for me and that is for CAS to uphold our appeal

 

[richards30]

Think we're being a bit precious here, with objections to the use of 'guilty or innocent' . We all know we haven't killed , maimed or slaughtered anyone, that accusation is aimed at our 'alleged' owners . Our club is,however, plying its trade under the governance of several footballing bodies and their associated rules and procedures. We have been found 'guilty' of breaching those rules in the past and have coughed up a few £million in 'fines'. There's nothing wrong with using this terminology. We now find ourselves back in an Appeal Court because they've had another bite at the cherry due to the discovery of other alleged transgressions. I don't attempt to understand fully the accounting rules and regs, i bow to your superior knowledge on this one and i am grateful for your posts and updates. I'm only interested in knowing whether we get off, or the punishment stands or perhaps lessened in some way . The label i don't want for our club is Cheat! so only one outcome for me and that is for CAS to uphold our appeal

we were initially found guilty when they changed a rule to make us fail last time though even though we were told what we were doing was ok when we sort advice! The pinch khaldoon mentions was the begging of uefa to not take it to court as they wanted FFP to be seen to work and the promise this was over for city for good if they complied going forward which was always the plan. Cerefin in my opinion is shitting himself as are you genuinely telling me the president has no idea and wasn’t involved in any details of banning a club from his competition?! When he was at a champions league game at the Etihad trying to cut a deal to which khaldoon told him to get fucked?!

 

[Coatigan]

Once we thought we managed to get in, I am fairly sure we didn't mind the FFP at all. I doubt people high up the Club are dying to see Saudis coming to the PL and give us another competition. It's not some too moral stand and I don't agree with it, but from business point of view, we surely didn't want FFP to disappear as long as we passed the test.

Potentially. There certainly is logic in that.
However that has not been their narrative in public, they have consistently said they believe development of any shouldnt be curtailed, and would welcome competition that improves us.

Of course you can argue they Would say that in public, but i personally beleive they (both culturally and businesswise) have the brash and confident mentality to really believe that.

 

[franksinatra]

You'd need to define an agenda.

I think that word is thrown around loosely on here and creates a lot of division.

Not every single media outlet is out to get us, however that makes it no less pertinent. There are still more than enough who have got on this bandwagon which has the sole purpose of smeering us. Quite a few of those journalists, in my opinion, will be on the Qatar payroll. That type of organised process filters down into those who don't understand it so they just shout it and repeat it ad nauseam. It's very easy for the truth to become lost in this type of situation.

So whilst it may not quantify an agenda, there is still ample evidence that there is Ill feeling toward us.

You seem as though you are using the wording of agenda to discredit the argument.

I think the reality is that you don't believe there is anything happening and that in fact quite a few blues are a little paranoid.

Please do correct me if I'm wrong

Yes I do think it is thrown round too loosely and it means different things to different people. I only use that term because, I believe, its my response to those questions, and in that thread, which frames the argument that I am
some how supportive of the press. Which could not be further from the truth.

I would say the relationship with sections of the media has deteriorated, over the past couple of years and agree there are some in the press who dislike us and their writing reflects that. Anyone can see that.

The Qatar argument has been proven so without doubt they are putting forward a narrative against the club.

Yes some blues I think go a bit far and can undermine some of the valid arguments and grievances we have with the press. It gives our detractors the opportunity to highlight those messages and portray the valid arguments as the writings of a bunch of loons. Anyway this is for another thread.

 

[KS55]

Yes I do think it is thrown round too loosely and it means different things to different people. I only use that term because, I believe, its my response to those questions, and in that thread, which frames the argument that I am
some how supportive of the press. Which could not be further from the truth.

I would say the relationship with sections of the media has deteriorated, over the past couple of years and agree there are some in the press who dislike us and their writing reflects that. Anyone can see that.

The Qatar argument has been proven so without doubt they are putting forward a narrative against the club.

Yes some blues I think go a bit far and can undermine some of the valid arguments and grievances we have with the press. It gives our detractors the opportunity to highlight those messages and portray the valid arguments as the writings of a bunch of loons. Anyway this is for another thread.

"Bunch of loons" is about right; we support Liddl Citeh, how mad is that?

 

[Gordyola]

What's the name of the lawyer that's representing us

Don’t Pannick UEFA don’t like it up em

 

[Gordyola]

If things don't go our way in court, is there anything to stop us setting up the CFG Cup next season on champion's league nights with a huge prize for the winner?

Competitions have to have approval from your country’s FA to start with

 

[KS55]

Competitions have to have approval from your country’s FA to start with

That's the only way the mad proposals from UEFA/G14 for a closed competition will be defeated. And the FA? Silence reigns.

 

[laserblue]

Arsenal being promoted by a vote and not by on field success likes your post.

The rags not relegated at the same time after Liverpool players threw a game to keep them up in the last game of the last season before football resumed after WW1 like your post.

 

[Coatigan]

will be, but I wouldn't bet the people at the club would be too happy if there's no FFP and they are free to compete us for future agueros and debruynes. Buddies are buddies, but interests are interests. Just look at Yemen, they were buddies until they realized they had different interests, then they almost went to fight each other (they actually did with proxy forces).

I wouldn't be happy to have another big competitor too, but I would absolutely accept their right to do so and if media and football organizations would oppress them on the same way they do oppress City, I would support their fight against that, even with some Newcastle fans being absolute twats to City. If City would act like ****s towards them, I'd say City are acting like ****s.

All true, but we already have Utd and Liverpool grossly outbidding us on targets and inflating the market, one more should hardly bother the owners.

 

[asahartford1]

Where have I ever said the media is not perverse?

Nobody has a lower opinion of certain sections of the media than me. The only difference is I think their behaviour is not unique to City but contemptible to anyone they can possibly attack.

Also I do not use a broad brush to categorise everybody in the media, hence I doubt everybody is conspiring against us. Sadly some people cannot see that you can doubt an agenda by the ‘media’ but still dislike large sections of them.

While i agree some people see stuff that isn't there, a little paranoid in some instances, I believe you came to the party a little late.
A couple of years ago you would argue there was no bias against City, you now try to legitimize your stance by saying the press has deteriorated. It was always politically motivated, helped by a legion of "sports journalists" ready and willing to jump on the bandwagon.The treatment of Sterling being a prime example, even the press admitted it, though of course it was always the other outlets, and not their own.
I am glad you got there in the end though.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Abso-fucking-lutely. Roman Abramovic came along and rained on everybody’s parade long before Sheikh Mansour turned up. Would Chelsea have fallen foul of these rules? Who knows. But I for one loved it as it broke up the United, Arsenal, Liverpool axis

In fact I remember wishing we had a Russian oligarch, and there was hope for all clubs. We all had a chance of the lottery win. Something those who remember Swales would have clung onto dearly. But here we are a few short years later (relatively). Chelsea’s investment is conveniently forgotten about. You can actually go back further to the Moore’s family (Littlewoods) investment in Liverpool who financially doped them in the 50’s. Newcastle, Everton and Wolves fans better not get ideas above their station. You can win the odd one off cup, but forget any ideas of a period of domination.

So yes, it does extend to other clubs you smart arse. I can point to my own and most other people’s acceptance of Chelsea’s success as exhibit A m’lud!

I'm interested in what you say about Chelsea. I felt exactly the same as you when Chelsea became genuine challengers and then champions thanks to Abramovitch. But in the end he threw his lot in with the 'istry boys because he couldn't stand the competition from City and he announced his Damascene conversion to Platini's FFP. And where I can't agree with you is that "Chelsea's investment is conveniently forgotten about" because I don't believe he's actually invested anything. I accept that he always intended that Chelsea should be able eventually to be successful and live within the means permitted by FFP, but then so did City. But Abramovitch had done exactly the same as Leeds and Portsmouth by making interest free) loans to the club (to be repaid within 180 days of him selling the club). Chelsea's debts are thus massive and Abramovitch/Chelsea have "taken advantage" of FFP to increase the club's debt to their holding company to well over £1 billion. Chelsea are rather vulnerable in the light of Abramovitch's difficulties with our government and the corona virus. I don't see what can be done about debt in football within the law but as PB points out to us FFP has made the problem worse not better and far from being the unqualified success for FFP that Platini claimed, Chelsea could be its most catastrophic failure. FFP doesn't protect clubs from owners who "walk away" unless they have made genuine investment and improved the financial stability of the club. We will notice that these two great failures of FFP - limiting genuine investment and protecting the financial stability of clubs - are supposed to be the great achievements of which UEFA are most proud.

Secondly, I note the use of the phrase "financial doping". I know very well you are using this Wengerism to mock the way supporters of FFP use it and I know you use it to show your contempt of the concept behind it but unfortunately many on here and at large don't. Wenger of course coined the phrase to refer to the use of illegal and immoral monies (ie shareholders' money) to improve performance just as athletes used performance enhancing drugs. This is, as we all can see clearly, typical typical of the nonsense spouted by Archbishop Arsene