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

[Bobo Fett]

We are innocent, as far as I'm concerned, as long as we can hide the fact we screwed FFp rules. Who gives the fuck about bent rule, it's football equivalent of abiding by apartheid rules. If there's a loophole we can use for uefa to not be able to prove anything, we're innocent. If you don't think there is a anti-city agenda with ffp just existing, then with all due respect, fuck off.

Mate, didn't FFP come in before City was taken over with the big investments? FFP as a concept is a reasonable fair one although I do believe it should have some flexibility to capture additional investment. I do believe owners should be allowed to invest more it's their perogative really. And maybe the other PL clubs were lobbying against City that is conceivable. But once the rules have been established then its a different game.

My strategy would be too challenge the proportionality of the punishment and get it reduced but looks like the club is gearing for the fight of all fights which I feel will have far reaching repurcussions for City.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

You don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.

You do when Uefa are the judge, jury and prosecution.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

You have been asked twice to clarify what City are guilty of but you refuse to give your view or any facts

Please enlighten us all

You'll be waiting a while.

 

[SebastianBlue]

You don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.

Yes, because UEFA are especially known for never taking inappropriate or unlawful action based on fabricated or (intentionally) misinterpreted information. And they are often held up as one of the most incorruptible organisations in the world...

 

[M18CTID]

Unless they obtained them quite recently which would explain why the story changed from "City not facing a ban" and "UEFA want a deal" to all-out war in the space of three weeks.

Given that Pinto has been banged up for about the past 12 months, what are the chances of that?
I think the severity of the punishment is as much to do with us refusing to accept a lesser one than anything else. I heard on Christmas Eve that we were getting a 3 year ban with 2 suspended and posted that on here on Jan 2nd so I think the club have known for a while that we were getting a ban of sorts.

 

[give it to gordon]

You don't get hit with such a penalty if you've done absolutely wrong.

you do if when its the bent uefa

 

[BosnianBlue]

Mate, didn't FFP come in before City was taken over with the big investments? FFP as a concept is a reasonable fair one although I do believe it should have some flexibility to capture additional investment. I do believe owners should be allowed to invest more it's their perogative really. And maybe the other PL clubs were lobbying against City that is conceivable. But once the rules have been established then its a different game.

My strategy would be too challenge the proportionality of the punishment and get it reduced but looks like the club is gearing for the fight of all fights which I feel will have far reaching repurcussions for City.

No it isn't, it was introduced when City came to scene. And PSG. there is nothing fair in the concept where owners can't invest the money in their business. it's fair only to those that are already on top and protected from anyone challenging them.

 

[Zenmanc]

You'll be waiting a while.

Again, unlike some here I'm not wasting my life combing through to figure out what we did and didn't do. We clearly arent innocent and if you can't admit maybe we've skirted rules to get where we are then it's pointless.

 

[Cobwebcat]

So having read this thread, listened to 93:20 etc etc, it seems there are a lot of layers to City's position that I have been trying to get straight in my head and wanted to put down is some kind of order. I think they are as follows but would welcome the thoughts of those better qualified than me:

1 UEFA leaked during a confidential process - however CAS have looked at this already and said they very probably did but City haven't proven they were damaged by it
2 The process was fundamentally flawed: scoping document produced after case had begun, case progressed without having read City's submission etc etc - again think we'd have to prove this damaged us?
3 We agreed a settlement covering the relevant period and you cannot now go back and reopen it - would obviously depend on the exact wording of the settlement agreement which none of us have seen
4 Your own 5 year rule means you can't reopen the case as it was opened 5 years after the settlement agreement but more than 5 after the year of the alleged offence - like Stefan on the 93:20 podcast says this seems so obvious you can't believe UEFA would have messed it up?
5 The evidence was hacked and is inadmissible - not sure this applies to UEFA processes and CAS as they are not courts?
6 The evidence is partial and here is the full email chain which shows there was no offence anyway - possible of course but we don't know what we or UEFA have here as evidence. The emails may have evidenced what was considered but not what actually happened?
7 The evidence is partial and actually the funds did not flow from our owner but from elsewhere in AD so there was no offence. This has the whole issue around what HH refers to in AD which others have already commented on.
8 The evidence is partial and the accountants of City, Etihad and indeed UEFA have signed off everything was above board so the source of funds for Etihad cannot be proven to be a problem
9 PB's point from earlier that the rules would need to be interpreted in light of current UEFA practice rather than what was in place at the time and so we would not have breached the current interpretation of FFP
10 The way other clubs have been treated for similar offences is fundamentally different
11 If this all fails, then off to a real Swiss court that FFP itself if illegal

Have I missed anything?

I think that might be the lot and we only have to prove one of them. I like point 9 I’d like that to be true.

 

[SidJames]

One aspect of this is that football is effectively beginning to eat itself. Nobody will want to put money into a club now because rules are subject to change and be retrospectively applied. Why take the risk and the threat to your personal integrity? Once SKY and BT see they are the main effective money streams where is the incentive to up the ante?

I am not saying our owners will leave but look at Nigel Wray at Saracens. Once sanctions applied he just walked away from the club. Basically in England the Premier League is confirming itself as TV's woman and quite probably ending the gravy train.

Everyone i know is already bored shitless with the Premier League procession to anoint their media darlings this Season.

Sy/BT are too thick to realize that less competition,means less interest,which means less subscribers.

Klopp already starting to act like Billy Big bollocks playing his Kids.

How long before he plays a team of reserves in the Premier League and TV viewers feel short changed.

The product is being damaged.

We gave Sky one of the best Premier Leagues in living memory and excellent viewing figures.The whole country was following events.

People are turning off already.Might come as a surprise to Sky/BT etc but Liverpool are the most hated and despised Club in the country.I never watch their games.I am not embarrassed to say my hatred for them is almost pathological,yes even worse than the Rags.