CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

[brummie blue]

That's looks like a balanced panel...

I was thinking more of a brainless one

 

[PistonBlue]

It was the same the other week mate - he was being accused of all sorts of nasty shit, so much so the thread had to be pulled multiple times.

I’ll admit that I was a little concerned that he’d over-egged things a bit on Friday, but on reflection I actually think he downplayed things a bit. I can’t say that for sure because I don’t know who told him what, but last night I heard a story that the staff at City were told on Friday that we’d won the case but the club couldn’t say anything publically due to the embargo. The info wasn’t limited to just a few people either, which may explain why the likes of Cheesy were tipped off. Remember though that Ian wasn’t even the first - @PistonBlue posted on here before Cheesy’s tweet that he’d heard the result was in and that if it was true then we’ll all be happy come Monday.

I would also add that it might explain why the likes of TH and Ric hadn’t heard anything. I’d imagine their sources are higher up at City and therefore more likely to be tight-lipped whereas some of the staff further down the line are perhaps more likely to let it slip to family and friends.

I didn't want to say too much at the time, but my info came from an ex-player who was told by a 3rd party. I was assured that if player x trusted the source then it was legit. I suspect Cheesy was sharing info from the same source. As I said, I'm not ITK, more a happy coincidence on Friday.

 

[jaiguruKun]

I suspect that UEFA's stance on costs would be that the case might not have gone to CAS if we had co-operated fully with the initial investigation. Bollocks of course but it's what they're likely to say.

 

[Selbyblue]

Which part of
"MANCHESTER CITY FC DID NOT DISGUISE EQUITY FUNDING AS SPONSORSHIP CONTRIBUTIONS"
is he struggling with??

All of it. Him and others are clinging to the fine as a sign of guilt.

 

[Shads]

I suspect that UEFA's stance on costs would be that the case might not have gone to CAS if we had co-operated fully with the initial investigation. Bollocks of course but it's what they're likely to say.

Unlikely. We did got to CAS to overturn the ban and we were successful in doing so. Therefore we prevailed and will most likely get substantial costs.

 

[Fordyboy46]

Sky praying Uefa take it to the Swiss courts, the absolute wankers.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Anybody in any doubt that the media would be gushing if the Rag's or Dipper's had been in our position and been exonerated this morning?

 

[Blue Til Death]

It’s no surprise the usual suspects are out from under their stones to proclaim our guilt despite the unequivocal ruling by CAS, they are all lucky I don’t work for City, I’d have the Jewson lot in court before the notional ink was dry on their pathetic tweets.. Come on City, let’s get at least one of the ****s for defamation to shut the rest of the pathetic fuckers up....!

 

[Jumanji]

Unlikely. We did got to CAS to overturn the ban and we were successful in doing so. Therefore we prevailed and will most likely get substantial costs.

Enough to offset the fine you think?

 

[Tricky_Trev]

Sky praying Uefa take it to the Swiss courts, the absolute wankers.

I hope they do too, it’d be hilarious

 

[SidJames]

It has been mentioned a few times already.Still i am going to say it again anyway, whilst i am feeling giddy..

Big thanks To Prestwich,Project, and all the other posters for their informative posts on FFP over the last few months.

You gave us all hope when we needed it most.

Even when i was not a member i came on here to read the posts and followed on Twitter.

I hope all of us City fans have an amazing day today.

Do not underestimate how important this ruling is.It will be a defining moment over the next few years.And our haters all know it.

 

[ONTHERUNWITHTHAKSIN]

Sky praying Uefa take it to the Swiss courts, the absolute wankers.

They will be asking for VAR in a minute

Clueless

 

[Pam]

Woke up multiple times last night... I'm in the states now so when I woke up at 5AM here time... I knew I couldn't get back to sleep knowing the decision was in. Got up and honestly had to prepare myself for the worst... milled around for a few. Had to decide where to go for the news... Opened up this forum and immediately saw the thread "... City exonerated." What a start to a week. Love this forum and this team.
CTID!!!!
GO YOU F##KING BLUES!!!!!!

Yeah baby.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Sky praying Uefa take it to the Swiss courts, the absolute wankers.

Narrator: UEFA will not take it to the Swiss courts.

 

[lancs blue]

I hope they do too, it’d be hilarious

Me too, I cannot imagine under which part of Swiss law they would challenge the CAS ruling. Bringing the original charge of disguised funding was barmy enough, challenging an independent ruling on it would be even crazier.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Anybody in any doubt that the media would be gushing if the Rag's or Dipper's had been in our position and been exonerated this morning?

Yes.

I doubt they would ever be in this position at all. ;-)

 

[BlueLou82]

Think your owner needs to make a statement regarding defamation and libel claims made agsinst the club and stop a few in their traks, otherwise they will just run on and on with their tweets/articles.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

I'd just like to say well done and thank you to @Prestwich_Blue, @projectriver and others on here who clearly paid their due diligence throughout to the case and the crux of the actual evidence which was being presented as opposed to the sub standard gutter journalism articles we've been served up. Good work guys.

 

[JamesMCFC]

It's finished at Nyon, UEFA have done all they can to get the 3 points. Manchester City are still alive here...

 

[Newman Noggs]

I suspect that UEFA's stance on costs would be that the case might not have gone to CAS if we had co-operated fully with the initial investigation. Bollocks of course but it's what they're likely to say.

You are correct. Where an obligation exists to co-operate with investigators it is not for the subject of the investigation to decide whether or not to co-operate. It's an allegation it's very difficult to lose on and we never denied it anyway but simply offered mitigation.

If you think about it, if non-co-operation was permitted, those who were up to no good would never co-operate thus denying investigators evidence they are entitled to. So whilst we had good trust-related (and probably commercial) reasons not to co-operate, it would be an exceptional ruling to find in our favour. I think that will go to costs but @Shads may be correct as regards arbitration. I've only been involved in High Court proceedings.