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

[bluemanchester]

What was it we used to sing about ocean Finance?

Knick knack paddy whack give the dog a bone
Ocean finance on the phone.
But the way I get words wrong in songs that could be wrong as well

 

[M18CTID]

It doesnt add up for me, either they have something on us or we have done a deal on something or someone??

If that's the other way round I see Liverpool sending us to the dogs.

Is it me or have we just rolled over & let Liverpool tickle our belly??

For me, it could be a lot more simple than that. Liverpool weren’t seen as an on the pitch rival back then. They finished something like 7th or 8th in 2012-13 and were so shit that they didn’t even qualify for Europe. We probably didn’t see them as much of a threat at the time which is very naive as the following season they challenged us for the title.

 

[franksinatra]

City have a vested interest in protecting “The Product” the PL, maybe the feeling was this could inflict damage on it and possible open up other scandals Also, as it happened 5 years ago they weren’t our direct rivals This is why in my view they accepted a private settlement

Yes I think you could be right in both instances, and hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it looks a poor decision now, particularly as the offence I do not think in all honesty would make little dent in the Premierships standing.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Knick knack paddy whack give the dog a bone
Ocean finance on the phone.
But the way I get words wrong in songs that could be wrong as well

You missed uni-ted
That spells fucking debt to me.

 

[nmc]

Well I have to say that was a cracking read written by Stefan Borson. Gives me more confidence going into the CAS hearing and if CAS are impartial they will show what a conniving bunch of crooks run the IC and AC. Come on City.

The time that the IC had to complete an investigation makes a mockery of the whole case.

 

[BillyShears]

For me, it could be a lot more simple than that. Liverpool weren’t seen as an on the pitch rival back then. They finished something like 7th or 8th in 2012-13 and were so shit that they didn’t even qualify for Europe. We probably didn’t see them as much of a threat at the time which is very naive as the following season they challenged us for the title.

Spot on. I'll bet anything that back then they looked at Ian Ayre and FSG as no different to Kroenke and the Arsenal board in terms of their ambitions. In many respects Liverpool (and FSG) have been very lucky. The key thing was Rogers fashioning a team with Sterling, Suarez, and Coutinho at its core.

The sale of those 3 players effectively gave FSG the financial backbone to do what they've done. The question is will they be able to repeat the trick with Salah, Mane, Firmino. I'm not sure they will.

In terms of FFP, and the current investigation. The pressure from inside the PL has come from Liverpool and United. In particular Liverpool's CEO Peter Moore. He's played international politics, especially within the media, really well. I've heard from people who know him and have worked with him closely that he's one of those types of plastic Scousers who really does think that they're special, and who has a particularly large chip on his shoulder about our success and our owners.

 

[dadnlad]

Spot on. I'll bet anything that back then they looked at Ian Ayre and FSG as no different to Kroenke and the Arsenal board in terms of their ambitions. In many respects Liverpool (and FSG) have been very lucky. The key thing was Rogers fashioning a team with Sterling, Suarez, and Coutinho at its core.

The sale of those 3 players effectively gave FSG the financial backbone to do what they've done. The question is will they be able to repeat the trick with Salah, Mane, Firmino. I'm not sure they will.

In terms of FFP, and the current investigation. The pressure from inside the PL has come from Liverpool and United. In particular Liverpool's CEO Peter Moore. He's played international politics, especially within the media, really well. I've heard from people who know him and have worked with him closely that he's one of those types of plastic Scousers who really does think that they're special, and who has a particularly large chip on his shoulder about our success and our owners.

bigger issue when big teeth moves on and that wont belong as achieved what he set out to do

 

[blue b4 the moon]

bigger issue when big teeth moves on and that wont belong as achieved what he set out to do

Trip forward slippyG

 

[The Colonel]

We know from the CAS1 appeal that City asserted all alleged breaches more than five years prior to the communication on 15 May 2019 are time barred by virtue of Article 37 of the Procedural Rules which expressly prohibits prosecution of any breach that took place more than five years prior.

The key word here is "breach" rather than the date of the settlement agreement in 2014. The breaches at the latest were in the 2012/2013 accounting year.

This view was backed-up by Stefan Borson in this article: https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-manchester-city-uefa-go-to-war/ and he also thinks Article 38 of the procedural rules doesn't apply.

Stefan is the house legal expert on here - see his occasional posts under the name projectriver

On the paragraph towards the end on ‘less firm ground’. Since this has been written, I presume, UEFA have since via Wenger of all people said that the current FFP favours those whom made their money in the past. It may be that they can’t, and don’t now want to make the argument that FFP doesn’t breach competition law.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Actually, Lord Pannick doesn’t get to pick his cases. If he is instructed, he is obliged to take the case whether he fancies his chances or not. That’s one of his professional rules.

What does happen, if he gets instructed in a case he doesn’t fancy, is he gives his client advice to the effect that they are on a loser. (And he charges 20k a day for that, too.) Sometimes even having given that advice his client wants to press on anyway. I can’t see Khaldoon taking this to CAS on the off chance his brief is being over cautious, however.

My point entirely. A QC will be brutally honest if necessary when he believes a case is not winnable because losing it will be expensive for the client and the QC doesn't want a reputation of being so gung ho that his advice is actually unprofessional and not worth having. Lord Pannick has earned the reputation he currently enjoys. And, I will add, so have Khaldoon and Ferran. So, I too would be surprised if they led City into a hearing that Lord Pannick thought was shaky. This is why I asked, in a post yesterday, if anyone knew when we briefed him, because the club has apparently been preparing this appeal since the case was first referred to the IC, and if that's the case, I find it hard to believe that the club would have rejected any offer of a deal from Ceferin out of hand without taking advice from Lord Pannick first.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

On the paragraph towards the end on ‘less firm ground’. Since this has been written, I presume, UEFA have since via Wenger of all people said that the current FFP favours those whom made their money in the past. It may be that they can’t, and don’t now want to make the argument that FFP doesn’t breach competition law.

As you've read, the "less firm ground" comment was in relation to fighting FFP at CAS as some other clubs have done. The precedent is that there will be no joy there and effectively CAS are not interested. Wenger is with FIFA not UEFA but in any case and his comments will not have any bearing on this. Hypocritical as he is it is still interesting that there is likely to be a groundswell of opinion in the football world recognising that investment is essential.

 

[Gremlin]

My point entirely. A QC will be brutally honest if necessary when he believes a case is not winnable because losing it will be expensive for the client and the QC doesn't want a reputation of being so gung ho that his advice is actually unprofessional and not worth having. Lord Pannick has earned the reputation he currently enjoys. And, I will add, so have Khaldoon and Ferran. So, I too would be surprised if they led City into a hearing that Lord Pannick thought was shaky. This is why I asked, in a post yesterday, if anyone knew when we briefed him, because the club has apparently been preparing this appeal since the case was first referred to the IC, and if that's the case, I find it hard to believe that the club would have rejected any offer of a deal from Ceferin out of hand without taking advice from Lord Pannick first.

I had the dubious pleasure of being involved in a commercial case a few years ago (as the technical/engineering advisor) and sat in on the QC's initial briefing. Despite him saying he thought the client had a good case, he strongly advised them to cut a deal both due to the costs and the vaguaries of the legal system meaning a win was by no means a foregone conclusion. Although a bit taken aback, the client took his advice and cut a deal.

I would be very surprised if Ferran/Soriano et al were quite so bullish if they hadn't had some fairly robust advice from the QC that they were on to a winner. However, as has been pointed out before - you never know until you get into the courtroom.

 

[laserblue]

For me, it could be a lot more simple than that. Liverpool weren’t seen as an on the pitch rival back then. They finished something like 7th or 8th in 2012-13 and were so shit that they didn’t even qualify for Europe. We probably didn’t see them as much of a threat at the time which is very naive as the following season they challenged us for the title.

They also failed FFP in 2012-13 and their failure to qualify for Europe saved them from being sanctioned.

 

[oldius]

They also failed FFP in 2012-13 and their failure to qualify for Europe saved them from being sanctioned.

As well as the superb Stanley Park development.

 

[crystal_mais]

Maybe I'm being cynical - but I have a feeling they're out to get us and that's how it will remain

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Maybe I'm being cynical - but I have a feeling they're out to get us and that's how it will remain

snap I’ve got this horrible feeling we are going to get fucked over some way next week. The fact they are using hacked out of context emails to nail us to a door shows they will stoop to any level to get us pushed out of their advert of a competition.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

As well as the superb Stanley Park development.

The most expensive small hole in the ground in history.

 

[nmc]

I had the dubious pleasure of being involved in a commercial case a few years ago (as the technical/engineering advisor) and sat in on the QC's initial briefing. Despite him saying he thought the client had a good case, he strongly advised them to cut a deal both due to the costs and the vaguaries of the legal system meaning a win was by no means a foregone conclusion. Although a bit taken aback, the client took his advice and cut a deal.

I would be very surprised if Ferran/Soriano et al were quite so bullish if they hadn't had some fairly robust advice from the QC that they were on to a winner. However, as has been pointed out before - you never know until you get into the courtroom.

You make a good point and the fact that we have refused to accept a compromise 'technical breach' would seem to suggest that our legal team are very optimistic. I would also think that optimism must be based on a point in law rather than expecting CAS to jump a particular way - so maybe we are ultra confident re UEFA being out of time re reopening the investigation - and we are very confident the whole thing will be struck out. Of course as Steffan says why wouldn't this be picked up by the AC? And having had sight of the case why have CAS listed it for 3 days - if it could be over in half a day!

 

[oldius]

The most expensive small hole in the ground in history.

It's like the world's best-ever training facility, ready to house the best ever assembled team, playing for the club with the greatest history, with a boot room of more than a million pairs of boots because the micro-organisms, that can fill this stadium to the rafters with similar mini-beasts, often have many pairs of legs. Such a shame that only Uefa, and selected Breck Road mini beasts, can see it.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I had the dubious pleasure of being involved in a commercial case a few years ago (as the technical/engineering advisor) and sat in on the QC's initial briefing. Despite him saying he thought the client had a good case, he strongly advised them to cut a deal both due to the costs and the vaguaries of the legal system meaning a win was by no means a foregone conclusion. Although a bit taken aback, the client took his advice and cut a deal.

I would be very surprised if Ferran/Soriano et al were quite so bullish if they hadn't had some fairly robust advice from the QC that they were on to a winner. However, as has been pointed out before - you never know until you get into the courtroom.

That is often what happens but I think this time will be different. City know that cutting a deal will just add to the huge reputational damage we have already suffered. I believe our bosses want their day in court. It has become personal. I don't think the public comments made so far by Khaldoon and Soriano are a bluff. They have a lot of personal reputation invested in this case.