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

[Blue Maverick]

It’s impressive that so many people think that City winning at CAS will somehow mean the end of FFP. It’s also surprising how few people have any idea what the case is actually about. Yesterday I was told by a well read business man that it was over misstating payments to players. Mr. Cohen mentions financial doping which I believe was a Wenger term for spending large amounts of money on players.

As far as we can tell, from the outside, our case relates to misstating the source of sponsorship funds but even at that so much of what has been reported as fact is in reality supposition and speculation.

I got told yesterday by a united fan we were been done for 19 different things, one been £16 million given by a company that doesn’t exist for the Sterling transfer, I asked him if he knew that we were been done from something pre Sterling, blank look, I pointed out it was about the Ethiad sponsorship, blank look, then he blurted out the Sterling thing again, I just laughed at him and this guy was a copper, I did suggest that’s why he was not a detective and just on the beat.

 

[lancs blue]

I HEARD today by a mate i see when am out shopping ????? again this is just word of mouth

that a 2 part deal has been agreed and both parties are happy ? could city ban been taken away suspended for 2 years and with city having to produce revue details and any future sponsorship deals over a 3 year period, but the uefa fine also handed will be cut in half because city was partly to blame and city admitted to the miss understandings of rules at the times

if that is true then city are still guilty and have cut a deal with the devil

Do you shop in Lausanne?

 

[CWMCFC]

NO, the club want 100% closure from this crap.

Nothing more, nothing less.

If there was a feeling that there was a chance we would lose and it's the difference between us copping a 2 year ban and bigger fine (which would have even bigger ramifications, given we would still be guilty), what option do you think the club are going to take?

 

[Blue Maverick]

Wouldn't your misses be happy just riding the big one

She doesn’t know she never has

 

[Len Rum]

UEFA have found x, City say it is wrong because of y,z and a and even if UEFA are right the sanction is disproportionate.

UEFA say, no it is right because of b, c and d. And UEFA say the sanction is not disproportionate and that CAS have no power to change it anyway.

CAS decide.

So the burden of proof is the responsibility of both sides?

 

[cityzen81]

If there was a feeling that there was a chance we would lose and it's the difference between us copping a 2 year ban and bigger fine (which would have even bigger ramifications, given we would still be guilty), what option do you think the club are going to take?

If that was the case then surely we would have taken the token fine Cerifin was supposedly flouting around back in December?

 

[supercity88]

It's very good news. Zero possibility that City would willingly co-ordinate with UEFA on this if we knew we had lost.

Looking at it another way, both parties do already know and UEFA would have everything to gain letting a guilty verdict be announced before Friday's draw.

I don't subscribe to the theory they wouldn't want anything being taken away from the actual draw, it would be the ultimate demonstration from UEFA to the lobbying clubs that they have put us back in our box.

City would also want to get their version out in the knowledge of a guilty verdict.

I completely agree. If we already knew we had lost then when the decision was announced wouldn't interest us. Whether it was before or after the draw, every headline would be about our ban and every CL game we played this season would have the same context. Similarly, UEFA would love nothing more than to get the verdict out there ahead of the draw. "Banned City learn their fate" would be the headlines regarding the draw, and if we were to win the CL this season most media outlets would suggest we should have been banned anyway and that it shouldn't really count. Perfect scenario for UEFA and it's supporters.

From our perspective, having a guilty verdict pre-draw would be beneficial. We can focus all talk onto winning it this season and making the most of still being in the competition. Our representatives will be in Nyom for the draw and could happily change the subject onto - we have a 2nd leg with Real and are fully focussed on this years competition. Waiting until Monday doesn't allow us to make a public display of strength in front of the media and at UEFA HQ, despite the verdict. That might get us a few headlines of "City remain upbeat despite ban". Perhaps the club would rather hide away too, but with press conferences every other day at the moment there's not really an opportunity to hide away.

A not guilty verdict being announced on Monday does however allow UEFA to hide away until the next CL/Europa draw when there might be something else to talk about. They wouldn't want Friday's proceedings to be all about our not guilty verdict with our top dogs sat grinning in the audience with their popcorn whilst Wenger, Bayern, Real and Juve sit there with a scornful look on their face. Oh and the Rags' reps for the Europa league draw.

Are we looking into this too much or do I pop the champagne?

 

[johnevans]

I'm more interested in what revue we'll be putting on ;)

Me too, Blue.. however, in this current age, I hope it's not one of the sort put on by Paul Raymond's Revue Bar! That would so 60s/70s! Mind, I bet there'd be a few on here who'd love to review the revue!

 

[CWMCFC]

If that was the case then surely we would have taken the token fine Cerifin was supposedly flouting around back in December?

We hadn't been punished then, nor had we gone through the entire court process at CAS and have a good idea about both sides arguments etc. Perhaps UEFA came to us with a much more respectable deal following the strength of our arguments?

This is just a rumour and i'm not putting any stock into it, but us coming to an agreement with UEFA post CAS (which is something the latter actively encourages) wouldn't be the biggest surprise in the world as there is always a chance we lose and the damage that could cause is far greater than us taking a deal.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Me too, Blue.. however, in this current age, I hope it's not one of the sort put on by Paul Raymond's Revue Bar! That would so 60s/70s! Mind, I bet there'd be a few on here who'd love to review the revue!

I'm thinking more It Ain't Half Hot Mum, tbh. Pep as La-di-da Gunner Graham on piano, for a start.

 

[jaiguruKun]

I got told yesterday by a united fan we were been done for 19 different things, one been £16 million given by a company that doesn’t exist for the Sterling transfer, I asked him if he knew that we were been done from something pre Sterling, blank look, I pointed out it was about the Ethiad sponsorship, blank look, then he blurted out the Sterling thing again, I just laughed at him and this guy was a copper, I did suggest that’s why he was not a detective and just on the beat.

Next time he pipes up you might want to point him in the direction of the AC's statement when announcing the ban which refers solely to overstating sponsorship revenue. There were no other types of alleged breaches referred to.

 

[HalfwayUpTheKippax]

I'm more interested in what revue we'll be putting on ;)

 

[Manchester33]

Let's put this simply. If City were bang to rights, we would have accepted a lesser punishment in December. We clearly must have a strong case otherwise we wouldn't drag out the negative publicity surrounding the case and the appeal. We would probably see staff members fired or resignations to help the club save face.

I genuinely trust the people running the club. We're run by the best minds in the industry. Do any of our fans truly believe we're going to blatantly 'cook the books' and not even bother to cover our tracks? Submit false accounts to HMRC? Somehow trick our new investors with falsified accounts? Mansour isn't a spoilt, silly Sheik with no clue on how the western world works. He's an incredibly intelligent businessman who values his reputation, not a shoddy back street Arab trying to con and bribe his way to the notoriety (despite the racist undertones from the MSM).

This whole process has happened because other clubs have pressured UEFA into doing something. UEFA probably know they haven't got a leg to stand on, but if CAS overturns the decision they can go back to the cartel, cap in hand and tell them 'we tried'.

 

[levets]

Totally random question and forgive my ignorance, but if this upheld, is there any chance CFG starts to pull some funding/support from the team for the time being and perhaps we lose our ability to be a big club long-term? I am not too familiar with the inner workings of how long-term CFG is committed to us?

‘Become’ a big club?

 

[Keeper!]

If there was a feeling that there was a chance we would lose and it's the difference between us copping a 2 year ban and bigger fine (which would have even bigger ramifications, given we would still be guilty), what option do you think the club are going to take?

I honestly believe the club want a complete and total end to this once and for all.

The Chairman has already said as much, otherwise we would have negotiated pre CAS.

 

[tonea2003]

No, burden is the appellants.

good job we have a comprehensive body of irrefeutable evidence then

 

[M18CTID]

Let's put this simply. If City were bang to rights, we would have accepted a lesser punishment in December. We clearly must have a strong case otherwise we wouldn't drag out the negative publicity surrounding the case and the appeal. We would probably see staff members fired or resignations to help the club save face.

I genuinely trust the people running the club. We're run by the best minds in the industry. Do any of our fans truly believe we're going to blatantly 'cook the books' and not even bother to cover our tracks? Submit false accounts to HMRC? Somehow trick our new investors with falsified accounts? Mansour isn't a spoilt, silly Sheik with no clue on how the western world works. He's an incredibly intelligent businessman who values his reputation, not a shoddy back street Arab trying to con and bribe his way to the notoriety (despite the racist undertones from the MSM).

This whole process has happened because other clubs have pressured UEFA into doing something. UEFA probably know they haven't got a leg to stand on, but if CAS overturns the decision they can go back to the cartel, cap in hand and tell them 'we tried'.

Agree with most of that. Still worried we might’ve done something stupid though - typical City and all that!

By the way, I have to ask you this - have you heard anything from your sources?

 

[KS55]

Was reviewing some other FFP judgments and this one is useful for showing where the burden of proof lies for City and why CAS will not overturn a 2 year ban if it finds UEFA are correct in their case...see http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/Shared Documents/4692.pdf#search=ffp settlement

"7.30 In doing so, the Sole Arbitrator adheres to the principle established by CAS jurisprudence that “in CAS arbitration, any party wishing to prevail on a disputed issue must discharge its burden of proof, i.e. it must meet the onus to substantiate its allegations and to affirmatively prove the facts on which it relies with respect to that issue, In other words, the party which asserts facts to support its rights has the burden of establishing them (..) The Code sets forth an adversarial system of arbitral justice, rather than an inquisitorial one. Hence, if a party wishes to establish some fact and persuade the deciding body, it must actively substantiate its allegations with convincing evidence” (e.g. CAS 2003/A/506, para. 54; CAS 2009/A/1810&1811, para. 46 and CAS 2009/A/1975, paras. 71ff).

7.31 However, the Sole Arbitrator finds that the Appellant has not adequately discharged the burden of proof to establish that the sanction imposed is evidently disproportionate and/or constitutes a breach of its right to equal treatment.

7.32 In doing so, the Sole Arbitrator first of all agrees with the Respondent that, pursuant to CAS jurisprudence, the review of a sanction is only possible when the sanction is evidently and grossly disproportionate to the breach, with means, inter alia, that the CAS must show restraint when evaluating whether a sanction is appropriate (see CAS 2012/A/2762 and CAS 2009/A/1844)."

7.30 is quite clear.
If uefa maintain that City breached ffp, they must prove the facts of the breach. If they were relying on DS email facsimiles alone, they would fail. What is their other evidence?
Similarly, City's audited accounts, backed by audit trail would prove that there was no breach, provided those accounts were a true and fair record.
We will win our appeal.

 

[CWMCFC]

I honestly believe the club want a complete and total end to this once and for all.

The Chairman has already said as much, otherwise we would have negotiated pre CAS.

I completely agree, but with so much on the line, this will be a decision very much guided by the legal team over pride.

If there was a respectable resolution on the table whilst there was even a small chance of losing at CAS, I can guarentee it will have been under serious consideration.

 

[Fordyboy46]

I just hope this verdict isn't delayed and we hear either way on Monday.