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

I know nothing about legal procedures so as I see it UEFA via its legal chambers looked at cerain evidence and decided we had broken their rules.
They then fined us and banned us accordingly. We appealed and won our appeal because their own evidence was bby their own rules inadmissable or not conclusive.
My question is did they know this evidence was unsatisfactory or were they simply not interested whether they. Won or not.?
In other words did they take the advice of their own legal people or did they disregard it ?
Either way surely we can sue that they were causing us various forms of financial loss either deliberately or accidentally by disregarding there own rules.

Is my logic wrong? If not it may pave the way for the reported meeting between our Mr K and their Mr C to give us top table status at a partially reformed and restructured UEFA. in return for holding fire on legal action.
 
Champions again in 2012 said:
I think I would have waited for the next CAS instalment before tweeting, but what do I know
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t worry too much about that. They’re hardly going to overturn their own decision and re-instate the ban. What I think it will show - and I could be wrong of course - is that City won (and UEFA lost) this case on multiple fronts.
 
M18CTID said:
I wouldn’t worry too much about that. They’re hardly going to overturn their own decision and re-instate the ban. What I think it will show - and I could be wrong of course - is that City won (and UEFA lost) this case on multiple fronts.
Click to expand...


I think you are right, but we all know the press won't report it that way.
 
M18CTID said:
I wouldn’t worry too much about that. They’re hardly going to overturn their own decision and re-instate the ban. What I think it will show - and I could be wrong of course - is that City won (and UEFA lost) this case on multiple fronts.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the evidence brought forward by UEFA not the verdict which is unequivocal
 
I’ve said before that UEFA is a multi layered organisation, with many different factions, all with different and sometimes opposing agendas.
To treat it as a single, united entity with a common goal is a mistake.

as has been said by others on here, it wouldn’t be surprising if certain elements were happy for the case to fail, given it will weaken the position of the ‘old guard’ who appear to be clutching at straws.

Ceferin, by all accounts, doesn’t want to continue this witch hunt and wants to build a proper working relationship.

fingers crossed.
 
Got a feeling CAS are gunna open their puckered arse hole and shit all over UEFA’s charges and the ‘evidence’ they presented - the UK media will realise they’ve been played and won’t be reporting on the full findings, mark my words, even when it’s spelt out to these liars they’ll still push the time barred misinformation campaign.
 
whipper said:
What worries me is that I think they knew they would lose.

What's there next attack going to be?
Click to expand...
Anything that delays our progress will do.
There problem is the need to relax FFP during post CV19 time.
Maybe PL will take upthe challenge now their man has been hand picked for that task
I feel they knew they would lose later rather than sooner so had to make the most of it.
In other words they initially mis judged the City reaction then hubris took over when their legal people warned of probable loss.
 
citymike1969 said:


FFS City... if you don't act on this then you've got no right to complain about the amount of bad mouthing going on.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

Got to say i agree fully with you here. I know we like to get stuff done quietly but having Kitson quietly having to say sorry doesn't cut it here. We should be seeing reports of "City take aim at "insert name here" for defamation" and letting the world know we won't take this wilfull lying sitting down. You can't let rubbish like this go unchecked. It, in my mind, demands action where the broadcaster has to make a full public statement saying we are sorry we let this occur and such slander will never be allowed on our station again. We feel points of view are important but in this case we allowed willful defamation to be broadcast without correcting it immediatly via our presenter/moderator.

More to that Kitson should see his pocket lighter paying for court costs and getting slammed for talking out of his rear end.

I agree fully with your sentiment that if we won't challenge it we should stfu saying its bad whilst wringing our hands. We have kept our powder dry long enough, time to light the fuse now we have the upper hand and are not inhibited by the court case any longer. Something tells me we will take more proactive action now where we can legally, well i hope we do.
 
SilverFox2 said:
Anything that delays our progress will do.
There problem is the need to relax FFP during post CV19 time.
Maybe PL will take upthe challenge now their man has been hand picked for that task
I feel they knew they would lose later rather than sooner so had to make the most of it.
In other words they initially mis judged the City reaction then hubris took over when their legal people warned of probable loss.
Click to expand...
The Premier League will not want us to humiliate them in a global scale like we have done to UEFA. They actually care about their image and ‘brand’ - and to accuse your most successful club over the past 10 years of cheating is not something they will do lightly.
 
City Man said:
Does anyone know what this sentence in the CAS statement means

"The CAS award emphasized that most of the alleged breaches reported by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the CFCB were either not established or time-barred".

"Most" to me means there are other alleged breaches that aren't excluded by being not established or time-barred. Is this something we should be concerned about?
Click to expand...

I obviously don't know but it's plausible that the things that don't fall under most could be related to the lack of cooperation.
 
Is the time barred period the same as which we were already fined and sanctioned for in 2014. I thought they were re-visiting this because they believe we fiddled the funding of the Etihad deal by Sheik Mansour providing the funding at that time

This being the bit of this case that we have been exonerated. Therefore there is nothing that was time barred that has any relevance
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
At least he’s got progressive views on racism, especially about Raz.....
Click to expand...



Who is this Dave Kitson? Didn't he play for Stoke a while back? How is he now such an expert on FFP and our case? Has he seen all the evidence ? Or is he just an opinionated nobody with some kind of axe to grind? I guess he hasn't got any experience in law, FFP, UEFA or CAS and like many struggle to comprehend the simple English in the Monday ruling by CAS.
 
Last edited:
@BluePhil8 said:
The Premier League will not want us to humiliate them in a global scale like we have done to UEFA. They actually care about their image and ‘brand’ - and to accuse your most successful club over the past 10 years of cheating is not something they will do lightly.
Click to expand...
I suppose using ref decisions and var decisions can do the job but any port in a storm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top