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.
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
After yesterday’s result I got to thinking, as unlikely as it might be, imagine we win the appeal and end up finishing 5th. Now that would be the Typical City to end all Typical City’s....
Of course, if it’s bad news next week, we should do everything in our power to finish 5th anyway.
Click to expand...

But if we lose the case doesn't 5th qualify for CL? So great news.
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
After yesterday’s result I got to thinking, as unlikely as it might be, imagine we win the appeal and end up finishing 5th. Now that would be the Typical City to end all Typical City’s....
Of course, if it’s bad news next week, we should do everything in our power to finish 5th anyway.
Click to expand...

Think there's a good chance we will still finish second even if we don't get another point.... but looking at the 5 fixtures we have left that ain't gonna happen.. not a chance
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
No garment rending here GDM, I assure you! I just don’t think it likely we could overhaul a 20 point deficit and still qualify for the CL without 2 or 3 of our best players? Do you?
Click to expand...
Your 20 point deficit point isn’t really central to the issue of CL qualification is it? Yes, I still think we’d finish top four without those three. Just.
 
TheRemainsOfTheDave said:
He's new, but it will take time for him to find his position I reckon.

As for this matter, I am sure he would have countered with "I don't agree" or something like that. I would have liked him to say "And on what basis, given UEFA's past controversies and history of failure at these hearings, plus City's accusations of UEFA misdoings in the investigation - of which CAS expressed equal concern of; the nature of the source of the initial investigation being a non-legally binding email discussion AND, of which City say they have submitted evidence to counter this said email, evidence which isn't in the public domain (or shouldn't be), do you come to this conclusion. Alan?" but more than likely he would have said "I don't agree".
Click to expand...

Or he could have just called him a ****.
 
projectriver said:
I'd work on the basis we put forward our clearest evidence as opposed to taking the petulant (and highly risky), "we will see you at CAS" approach. Somehow (and hopefully we find out in a judgment) the AC got themselves comfortable in getting over our evidence.
Click to expand...

Presumably then, if we did submit our clearest evidence, the AC were unfazed by the prospect of effectively deeming our accounts fraudulent then? Or would that not have been an issue for them, and they rather made their judgment on our failure to come up with a credible explanation for the content of those emails?
 
I note that two of the three members of the CAS panel for the appeal, were also on the CAS panel for our initial CAS appeal (the appeal to have the leaks evidence thrown out, which was dismissed because we were still to go through the AC).

The two individuals are the German lawyer (appointed by UEFA) and the French lawyer who sounds like he’s English (first name Andrew - he was appointed by City). It’s interesting to go back and look at the transcript of that appeal. They did make some comments which were favourable to City, but ruled that they had no jurisdiction because the matter had not been finalised by the AC.

Both these guys are therefore already across quite a few of the issues in dispute.
 
Exeter Blue I am here said:
Presumably then, if we did submit our clearest evidence, the AC were unfazed by the prospect of effectively deeming our accounts fraudulent then? Or would that not have been an issue for them, and they rather made their judgment on our failure to come up with a credible explanation for the content of those emails?
Click to expand...

Really don't know. Speculation upon speculation as to how the AC got over issues. We shall see.
 
blue b4 the moon said:
Didn't the AC make a judgement on what the IC sent them which included no evidence from City as we'd 'refused to cooperate'?

The IC should we win will be thrown under the bus as the AC can just point out they only had one side to look at.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking along exactly the same lines. The AC can only review whatever the IC push through to it. If that consisted only of the IC's own conclusions without (as we understand) any evidence offered by City then under the circumstances it's not too much of a stretch to think that the AC simply rubber stamped the IC's verdict.

It's also worth remembering that the IC has very limited powers of sanction to a maximum fine of 200,000 Euros. That was always going to be referred to the AC for it to impose a much heavier penalty. As far as I can see the AC is just the IC on steroids and part of the same problem.
 
jaigurugoat said:
No as barristers from the same chambers go up against each other all the time. It's also quite common for a Judge to be from the same chambers as an advocate in a case.
Click to expand...
Where barristers from the same chambers are up against each other, they are desperate to win. Professional points scoring! They will try their utmost.
 
laserblue said:
I'm thinking along exactly the same lines. The AC can only review whatever the IC push through to it. If that consisted only of the IC's own conclusions without (as we understand) any evidence offered by City then under the circumstances it's not too much of a stretch to think that the AC simply rubber stamped the IC's verdict.

It's also worth remembering that the IC has very limited powers of sanction to a maximum fine of 200,000 Euros. That was always going to be referred to the AC for it to impose a much heavier penalty. As far as I can see the AC is just the IC on steroids and part of the same problem.
Click to expand...
The AC can call for further evidence, not limited to what the IC submit.
 
STOP PRESS. LATEST.
The kindling for the white smoke is being prepared.
Bluemooners continue to speculate nervously.
Yves Leterme has gone into hiding.
And still we wait..........
 
Talk this morning about KDB. So, here is a reminder of his full quote:

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/de-...before-deciding-man/dbqj7x3m2z8l1mhkprz0fea1v


"The club has told us that they are going to appeal and that they are almost 100 per cent sure they are in the right. That's why I'm waiting to see what will happen.

"I trust my team. Once the statement is made, I will review everything. Two years [without European football] would be a long time. If it is one year I might see."

"I think Pep said he will see out the last year [of his contract] anyway no matter what. Then his contract ends. But I'm not going to let my decision depend on what Pep is doing," he added.

"Of course I have already worked with other coaches and when Pep leaves, I have to continue working with someone else. But I haven't really paid much attention to that for the time being. There are more important things at the moment."

“In recent years, and before then too, there have been many teams who have enquired and may have asked about me. But to be honest, I'm very happy with City," De Bruyne explained.

"I play for one of the best teams in the world, I play in England - in my view the best competition - and I like that. It remains a challenge to be the best and I need that too.

"Whatever comes, comes. But it's not that I've tried to leave City in these past five years. I have also remained calm over previous transfers. I have never had any problems and have always waited for my moment. With respect, because I think you get most of it back. Even outside of football.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top