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

[Marvin]

And that is why we must win this.

Anfield last week was worse than any European game. I refer to Liverpool's fans and the refereeing.

 

[laserblue]

And don't forget the special Liverpool rule: "The money was spent by previous owners, so it doesn't count."

Despite FSG having taken over from the previous owners in 2010 and perpetrating the fraud in 2015 to avoid failing FFP and being sanctioned. Littlewoods FC's cheating of FFP in 2013 was on their watch too and they were only saved by being so shit they failed to qualify for Europe.

 

[Marvin]

Yes, but it seems it was unclear at the time whether the adjudicatory body had the power to decide any punishment for itself or was bound to follow the investigatory panel's rec.

It was always my understanding that the AC was free to make any decision, subject to executive ratification. The Athletic's report says there wont be a punishment which means either that the AC has met, or it means that there is strong new evidence, or it means that the UEFA judicial process is not free and City have received some assurance from their executive.

Or of course the Athletic could be wrong or over-egging their understanding.

It's not clear-cut. I'm still positive because an Exclusive No ban is a strong claim and only made with good reason, but it just seems hard to justify given the reported timeline. I think it only makes sense if the case has been ongoing and subject to discussion and negotiation with UEFA after the Investigatory Chamber's referral.

 

[domalino]

It was always my understanding that the AC was free to make any decision, subject to executive ratification. The Athletic's report says there wont be a punishment which means either that the AC has met, or it means that there is strong new evidence, or it means that the UEFA judicial process is not free and City have received some assurance from their executive.

Or of course the Athletic could be wrong or over-egging their understanding.

It's not clear-cut. I'm still positive because an Exclusive No ban is a strong claim and only made with good reason, but it just seems hard to justify given the reported timeline. I think it only makes sense if the case has been ongoing and subject to discussion and negotiation with UEFA after the Investigatory Chamber's referral.

Sam Lee said on the podcast with Ahsan that the AC has been looking at this the whole time the IC's decision was being fought over at CAS

 

[George Hannah]

It was always my understanding that the AC was free to make any decision, subject to executive ratification. The Athletic's report says there wont be a punishment which means either that the AC has met, or it means that there is strong new evidence, or it means that the UEFA judicial process is not free and City have received some assurance from their executive.

Or of course the Athletic could be wrong or over-egging their understanding.

It's not clear-cut. I'm still positive because an Exclusive No ban is a strong claim and only made with good reason, but it just seems hard to justify given the reported timeline. I think it only makes sense if the case has been ongoing and subject to discussion and negotiation with UEFA after the Investigatory Chamber's referral.

Meanwhile the headline tickers still scroll on CNN, Sky, BBC et al - that our challenge has 'failed'

 

[caseball]

Can he send me a gigolo please,make that 2

As is so often the case, the Japanese have just what one needs.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Sam Lee said on the podcast with Ahsan that the AC has been looking at this the whole time the IC's decision was being fought over at CAS

Common sense would suggest so, but common sense would also suggest that there is much going on behind the scenes.

As regards the Athletic report, I won't believe a word of it until UEFA publish their findings. There are far too many vested interests involved and it's esy to believe the one report we want to believe than the myriad "leaks" suggesting otherwise.

Having said that, if I was one of the journalists/broadcasters who have been given to liberal use of the term "financial doping" with its damaging connotations of cheating, a term that was deliberately coined when the more appropriate term "investment" was applicable, I'd be getting a bit windy about Sam Lee's prediction.

 

[King KdB of Belgium]

Just because we failed with this challenge. It does not mean that we cannot put in a new challenge to CAS, once we know what UEFA has decided to gives us as a punishment, for the breaking of the FFP rules. So now what we have got to do. is to go after the person/s who where asked to do the hacking and the person who did the hacking itself. It does not matter where the person who did the hacking was based. As the man City computers where hacked in this country the rules of law apply to what they are here.

If and when this should go to court and should we win we should go for as much money as we can get. If this means that it should bankrupt a person or a company so be it. Maybe then they would not try anything like this again.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Sam Lee said on the podcast with Ahsan that the AC has been looking at this the whole time the IC's decision was being fought over at CAS

Of course they have. Like I said, a deal's probably been cooked up. We'll see shortly I guess.

 

[George Hannah]

Of course they have. Like I said, a deal's probably been cooked up. We'll see shortly I guess.

Meanwhile our reputation continues to be deliberately damaged by US owned/influenced media reports of 'Man City's failure'
- not looking a great deal in PR terms at least currently.