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

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Cribbage lol. Half the forum won't have a clue what you're on about.

I expect the elderly members like @oakiecokie @Prestwich_Blue and @Rammy Blue will.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

We won't be accepting any fine.

As far as we are concerned, we can keep it in litigation for an eternity.

And certainly not to spare Uefa bankruptcy.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began.

All the way to CAS.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Cribbage lol. Half the forum won't have a clue what you're on about.

Too young to remember him voicing the Wombles?

 

[domalino]

We won't be accepting any fine.

As far as we are concerned, we can keep it in litigation for an eternity.

And certainly not to spare Uefa bankruptcy.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began.

All the way to CAS.

I don't think the "keep it in litigation forever" line works at this point either as a strategy or as a public comment. It's not clearing our name, and it makes people think we're guilty but just throwing our financial weight around in the courts to escape judgement.

We need the case to be closed and the ruling in our favour if we are in the right.

That's the beginning of the push back against the narrative that we flagrantly break rules. Then you have proof that a legitimate court says you're innocent and UEFA are running a kangaroo court.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Why bother replying to a dick that thinks a refusal to comment is an admission of guilt?

I replied to one, who was saying that Der Spiegel published these documents & City didn't deny they were genuine therefore we must be guilty. My reply was that it was all about context and that the DS were very selective about what they did publish &, for example, didn't include anything on the UEFA rule change that screwed us over. (Incidentally I've recently found out that we went to UEFA 3 times with our 2012 accounts to check we'd meet the Annex XI requirement and 3 times UEFA said that we would). Without understanding that, everything we did in the 2013 financial year looks much more shifty than it was.

My analogy was imagine you're having some banter with your mates via text or WhatsApp. They put up a photo of you that's less than flattering and you reply "You bastards. I'll kill you" or words to that effect. Or they're taunting you because they're going on a holiday you weren't able to go on & you send a message saying "I'm going to put a bomb on the plane". Someone who hadn't seen the rest of the exchange sees you send that message & reports it to the police. On the basis of that, you get arrested but when you explain the background & show them the rest of the messages they realise it was a joke between mates & let you go. Context is crucial.

Just to finally make the point, I was at a Football Writers Festival event in September where David Conn & a sports lawyer called Daniel Geey, who's a Liverpool fan, were talking about football finances. This particular subject came up of course and even David said that there was nothing in the Der Spiegel articles that was remotely like a smoking gun and that it was all a bit 'meh'. Daniel fully agreed with him.

 

[Eds]

We won't be accepting any fine.

As far as we are concerned, we can keep it in litigation for an eternity.

And certainly not to spare Uefa bankruptcy.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began.

All the way to CAS.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began - you mean they know who said what, where and when? In which case we may be due a windfall of cash when we sue all the fuckers!

 

[BringBackSwales]

I expect the elderly members like @oakiecokie @Prestwich_Blue and @Rammy Blue will.

You are beginning to sound like Alan pardew

 

[BringBackSwales]

I replied to one, who was saying that Der Spiegel published these documents & City didn't deny they were genuine therefore we must be guilty. My reply was that it was all about context and that the DS were very selective about what they did publish &, for example, didn't include anything on the UEFA rule change that screwed us over. (Incidentally I've recently found out that we went to UEFA 3 times with our 2012 accounts to check we'd meet the Annex XI requirement and 3 times UEFA said that we would). Without understanding that, everything we did in the 2013 financial year looks much more shifty than it was.

My analogy was imagine you're having some banter with your mates via text or WhatsApp. They put up a photo of you that's less than flattering and you reply "You bastards. I'll kill you" or words to that effect. Or they're taunting you because they're going on a holiday you weren't able to go on & you send a message saying "I'm going to put a bomb on the plane". Someone who hadn't seen the rest of the exchange sees you send that message & reports it to the police. On the basis of that, you get arrested but when you explain the background & show them the rest of the messages they realise it was a joke between mates & let you go.

Just to finally make the point, I was at a Football Writers Festival event in September where David Conn & a sports lawyer called Daniel Geey, who's a Liverpool fan were talking about football finances. This particular subject came up of course and even David said that there was nothing in the Der Spiegel articles that was remotely like a smoking gun and that it was all a bit 'meh'. Daniel fully agreed with him.

Did you give David Conn a smack?

 

[BringBackSwales]

They've done that for the last 3 seasons. Why would this year be any different?

That was exactly my point, it won’t change, they fuck us over on the pitch, no need to ban us

 

[M18CTID]