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

[Mancity1980]

The decision was not necessarily made nearly a month ago and CAS don't announce the verdict to anyone until they're ready to do so. Even leaky UEFA are bound by CAS's non-disclosure conditions, especially having had a bit of a rap on the knuckles at the first appeal for the leaks regarding the IC hearing.

Despite that being the case I am amazed that a hearing of such magnitude can withhold a decision for so long without even a whisper. It makes me think why. Depending on the verdict who is most able and or willing to do so? Who has the greater power to shut the other party up during this silence period? Verdict or no verdict both city and UEFA know what transpired during the CAS hearing and they will both have a pretty good idea of the outcome.

I have always been a glass half full kind of person (despite being a city fan since 1980!) and I can’t help seeing these indicators as being in our favour.

 

[Mancity1980]

You could look at it that way, and you may well be right, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that. It could just be that this ties in with the story of UEFA asking for the decision to be put back so as not to clash with the CL draw on 10th July and City have agreed to this too. Or that they’ve already come to a decision but are drafting up the report. Or that the judges are busy with other work too so haven’t yet reached a decision as I doubt this is the only thing they’re currently working on.

Would UEFA want the decision pushed back if it was in their favour? I don’t think so.

 

[M18CTID]

Would UEFA want the decision pushed back if it was in their favour? I don’t think so.

Perhaps not. I think we can interpret these things many different ways and that angle gives cause for optimism, but then another theory comes up and I start feeling pessimistic again!

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Would UEFA want the decision pushed back if it was in their favour? I don’t think so.

I don't think UEFA will know. I think they'd be hedging their bets that losing on that day would bring sufficient negatives that holding out in the hope of a positive isn't worth it, so just delay it and it's its own separate issue on a different day.

 

[cityzen81]

Perhaps not. I think we can interpret these things many different ways and that angle gives cause for optimism, but then another theory comes up and I start feeling pessimistic again!

The other theory about them not wanting it to clash with the CL draw is nonsense (to me anyway).

I think it’s safe to say in this current climate the draw is not a big deal this year.

I personally feel, they know they have lost and don’t want to have to face the barrage of questions and scrutiny from the worlds media.

With how they have acted in the past, I have now doubt they would have relished in announcing to the world they have banned us and labelled us cheats as soon as they could, draw or not.

 

[Gremlin]

I have just read that the decision will be in around 11 days time. I find it strange that no leak of the verdict has occurred after a decision was made nearly a month ago. Is that good or bad?

The leaks in the past have come from UEFA but it's not UEFA who are doing the deliberating this time, it's CAS (who are evidently not so leaky). If CAS haven't said anything to UEFA or City yet (and why should they?) the simple reason we haven't heard a whisper yet is that nobody who is likely to leak it actually knows anything.

 

[Marvin]

The leaks in the past have come from UEFA but it's not UEFA who are doing the deliberating this time, it's CAS (who are evidently not so leaky). If CAS haven't said anything to UEFA or City yet (and why should they?) the simple reason we haven't heard a whisper yet is that nobody who is likely to leak it actually knows anything.

Both sets of lawyers though will have fed back to their corners, and their corners leak, especially UEFA's.

City appeared on face value to be very confident before the case, so it's possible that it was clear cut. The UEFA case as presented in the media looks weak, the question is are CAS strong enough to face down 'public opinion'.

 

[Ribchester]

My view is that from what I’ve read is that CAS usually end up referring cases where UEFA have fucked up back to the the two parties to revisit and compromise. Three things could be happening here hence the delay. One- UEFA and City are negotiating a compromise ( I fukin hope not). Two- City have told Uefa to fuk off and have now got CAS leg of the process out of the way and are now proceeding with law suites against UEFA or if it has gone against us we are off to Switzerland and have made this clear to all concerned. all 3 actions would cause UEFA to need time.

The 3rd outcome .... guilty as charged.... would have leaked by now Gill for one would have not been able to contain himself. Unless they all now this is the worst outcome and City are going to derail the whole UEFA cartel and because this now takes the case into real law as opposed to the fantasy land of UEFA then any leaks have real legally bound repercussions

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The decision was not necessarily made nearly a month ago and CAS don't announce the verdict to anyone until they're ready to do so. Even leaky UEFA are bound by CAS's non-disclosure conditions, especially having had a bit of a rap on the knuckles at the first appeal for the leaks regarding the IC hearing.

Quite - the timeframe is pretty standard. There isn't anything to be leaked, so there are no leaks.

I don't understand the regular comments about CAS being iffy. They're the international body of appeal for sports. If they weren't solid, sports businesses wouldn't accept them as the appeals body.

 

[Mancity1980]

I don't think UEFA will know. I think they'd be hedging their bets that losing on that day would bring sufficient negatives that holding out in the hope of a positive isn't worth it, so just delay it and it's its own separate issue on a different day.

No, they won’t KNOW, but they will have a pretty good idea. They have presented their case and seen city’s “irrevocable” proof. You could be right but without doubt they are worried, even your note of caution suggests that.