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.
Whilst I think a lot of what UEFA says amounts to alleging our accounts are false, they won't put it like that - its too serious an accusation and one they simply couldn't sustain and definitely not in a 3 day hearing in CAS. Think more UEFA: "we believe Manchester City's accounts do not properly reflect the commercial reality of the Etihad contract and accordingly for FFP purposes we discount the revenue by £xm" or some other nice way of saying it.
But whether UEFA put it like that or not presumably the CAS panel could also see that it's tantamount to an allegation of falsifying accounts and therefore may require rather more concrete evidence than a "balance of probabilities" judgement?
 
If they essentially accuse us of a criminal offense like fraud, and we can prove that this never happened, or rather UEFA cannot prove their accusation, certainly there would be grounds for suing them for damages in a real court? Cue the 50 million lawsuit that is always being made fun of on here.
Offence.
 
City. Will. Not. Sue. Anybody. After. CAS.
This is wrong. I’ve just been instructed by City to commence a claim against UEFA in the small claims court. I can’t provide any more details at this stage, other than to confirm that they’ve agreed to pay my professional fee in beer tokens, which is much more tax efficient.
 
But whether UEFA put it like that or not presumably the CAS panel could also see that it's tantamount to an allegation of falsifying accounts and therefore may require rather more concrete evidence than a "balance of probabilities" judgement?
Dunno. A High Court judge would see right through it and make them make good such a serious claim or lose. CAS? Doubt it.
 
This is wrong. I’ve just been instructed by City to commence a claim against UEFA in the small claims court. I can’t provide any more details at this stage, other than to confirm that they’ve agreed to pay my professional fee in beer tokens, which is much more tax efficient.

Wake up, wake up, wake up, it's the 1st of tha month, so cash your cheques and come on.
 
Whilst I think a lot of what UEFA says amounts to alleging our accounts are false, they won't put it like that - its too serious an accusation and one they simply couldn't sustain and definitely not in a 3 day hearing in CAS. Think more UEFA: "we believe Manchester City's accounts do not properly reflect the commercial reality of the Etihad contract and accordingly for FFP purposes we discount the revenue by £xm" or some other nice way of saying it.

There will be no suing UEFA for damages. People can keep demanding it but it simply won't be happening.


Shame..!
 
hence the rules are corrupt as fuck! how much debt are barca and madrid in combined??
In fairness they don't have to be fair.
They are a golf club that makes rules to suit its members. If they fail to blackball us they handicap us for having the audacity to compete successfully in their competitions. Whats wrong with that?
 
Whilst I think a lot of what UEFA says amounts to alleging our accounts are false, they won't put it like that - its too serious an accusation and one they simply couldn't sustain and definitely not in a 3 day hearing in CAS. Think more UEFA: "we believe Manchester City's accounts do not properly reflect the commercial reality of the Etihad contract and accordingly for FFP purposes we discount the revenue by £xm" or some other nice way of saying it.

There will be no suing UEFA for damages. People can keep demanding it but it simply won't be happening.

I had no intention of suggesting that City will sue anyone for damages or even that City's appeal hasn't been upheld. I'm simply trying to probe ( = speculate on) in what way UEFA claim we are responsible for "serious breaches" of FFP. I believe our accounts have been audited, and the auditors have issued a statement that the accounts are actually a true and accurate account, and examined several times by UEFA and there is a statement from Etihad to say they have fulfilled all their obligations. Surely there is no way "nice" enough to dress up saying that the accounts "do not properly reflect the commercial reality of the Etihad contract" that would escape the most cursory attention of our counsel. Surely UEFA would have to put up or shut up - and even the claim quoted above would need proof rather than "balance of probabilities. What I'm saying is, I suppose, that if UEFA believe there is any doubt at all about City's accounts it would be far too serious to be dealt with in the IC, the AC or CAS. And I can't see what they've got to sustain such a claim and certainly not to prove it beyond all reasonable doubt. Pleas give me your opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top