This morning I said that I HOPE, not know, think or even expect that part of City's defence would be a full frontal assault on FFP. Now, up to this point we have no irrefutable evidence as to what the club's attitude to FFP is and we can argue until we're sky blue in the face about it. What also appears to be the case is that certain clubs supported the introduction of FFP primarily, it seems, so that other clubs could not benefit from owner investment to outspend them at a time when they needed to cut back, largely due to the effects of the financial crisis. It appears that City were one of the clubs targeted directly and in 2014 were sanctioned despite insisting they were responsible for no wrong doing. City took the "pinch" because they considered the interests of other groups involvd, such as sponsors, though City insisted on the superiority of its high investment model over the protectionist UEFA model. It appears the 2014 settlement has not settled much at all and City find themselves targeted again. The club may well feel that FFP is intended to be a permanent thorn in its side.
What you don't appear to consider at all is that attitudes change and develop as circumstances change and develop. I find it difficult to believe that the club's attitude to FFP will not at least have hardened as a result of recent developments. I hope that City's legal team has ripped the case for FFP to shreds in CAS - and I think it more than possible such an attack was part of our defence - and that CAS could even question its legality in the judgement but I don't expect this. If City's appeal is upheld - and I am confident it will be - I think the club will believe this to be the last time FFP is a concern. They will consider a crusade against FFPR to be other clubs good cause. This is not because of any love for the regulations. You have never heard any official at City express the kind of protectionist rubbish that you put forward: yours is the logic of Old Trafford, the Allianz and elsewhere. City are creating a football group which requires heavy investment, imagination, planning, vision and COMPETITION. If City can do that without recourse to legal action against FFP they will, but if not ... And a football group worth $5 billion does have unlimited funds for litigation, but you make progress quicker if it can be avoided.
The real problem arises if the CAS decision goes in UEFA's favour. The consequences may well be disastrous and felt for a long time, throughout the group. It is hard to see the Sheikh and his advisers accepting defeat with a whimper. Accepting that their venture was ruined by rules which defy sense, reason and the most superficial analysis and which appear to permit what the law clearly prohibits. What will your alternative be then? Will you still see FFP as City's essential safeguard from the Saudis and the Chinese?
