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.
manimanc said:
Mate it's the BBC.
Biggest
Bellends
Corporation.

Expect nothing but sarcasm and cheap shots from them ****s.
Click to expand...
The albeeb sports department takes its narrative from the rag PR machine. Yesterday they were claiming that Greenwood was the second coming of christ the redeemer himself.
 
Pam said:
They will say very little if the conclusion is favourable because we have to move on. But if we lose the case, I expect us to mount a legal challenge against the entire self-serving, monopoly seeking bullshit that is FFPR. We may be banned. But we can still take UEFA out and cost them a fortune in legal fees by doing so.
Click to expand...

I’m getting ahead of myself and I shouldn’t.
I’m just praying
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pam
bobbyowenquiff said:
The BBC report, as usual is riddled with inaccuracies and unfair. It states that UEFA's case against City is based on "thousands of leaked emails." That's not true as Der Spiegel only published a very small number and there has been no suggestion there are any more.
The BBC report also states that City have been accused of "inflating sponsor deals above their true value" That's not true either. Although the misleading phrase "overstated " is mentioned by UEFA the allegations are nothing to do with the value of the deals. They are about where the sponsor money came from. Of course we haven't seen all the evidence but neither has the BBC so how can they report this as fact.
Click to expand...
But how can we expect a tiny non tax payer funded organisation like the BBC to have enough staffing, time or resources to Google ‘Man City UEFA charges’?

That would surely take 2 minutes, which sadly the Biased Bullshitting Cünts don’t have.
 
Blue Hefner said:
Horrible ****s. It’s happened to us

FYI, once you replace your patio doors go for a PatLock https://www.patlock.co.uk/
Click to expand...
in the meantime.
3x2treated.jpg
 
T
happy said:
In a world of wrong, this stands head and shoulders above all the rest.

Reputation matters a great deal to our owners, unless of course you believe that ADUG have invested all this money out of a deep seated love for Manchester, perhaps a member of the family once got lucky on Grey Mare Lane?

Of course the laws are wrong, of that there is little doubt but nobody asked City to join the club, we took our seat at the table and now we're kicking it over, hardly surprising then that this has irked a few people.

A one year ban, should such a thing even be possible would be a disaster for City, the owners will lose face and who knows how they will react, this is a family that aren't used to losing.
Click to expand...
That makes zero sense! They've invested far too much into the club to quit now. They aren't going to be making shitty business decisions because of a stitch up. The fight for restored reputation will go on and next time it will be the whole FFPR racket itself that will be on trial. The owners are big on reputation alright but that works in our favour. You don't rescue reputation by giving up and slinking away.
 
If we do win the appeal i dont think the media will go gung-ho with negative headlines like "cheats prosper" or similar because they would leave themselves wide open to a lible case , but if we lose the appeal the headlines are not going to be pleasant reading we have no defence , but the media have been saying that all season , so what's new.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
I think the idea is that the idea of preventing unlimited funding by an owner will be redundant if money can be funnelled through a 3rd party, and not count as coming from a single source.
It's the only reason I can think of that threatens any of FFP, and of course, relies on City's owners having done that.
Click to expand...
If the FFP rules prohibited accepting sponsor money from firms which get state support then it would hit most Premier League Clubs. For example lots of firms get state aid. So it would rule out all the Emirate deals, Gazprom, and of course the Rags most long-standing sponsor Saudi Telecom (who also get state aid) That would be a lovely can of worms.
 
jimmygrimblesboots said:
If we do win the appeal i dont think the media will go gung-ho with negative headlines like "cheats prosper" or similar because they would leave themselves wide open to a lible case , but if we lose the appeal the headlines are not going to be pleasant reading we have no defence , but the media have been saying that all season , so what's new.
Click to expand...

If we lose it's best not to view/hear any media for the next couple of months. It won't be pretty.
 
whipper said:
A counter would be lost in a sea of aggression from the media if we lost.
Click to expand...

To a great extent yes but surely everyone will carry quotes from Guardiola. He's box office.

Saying that, these may just be the embargoed quotes from the press conference on Saturday. Sunday 1030 the press officer said. This is standard practice for the Monday papers. Interested to see what's said given Tolmie's reference to his confidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top