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

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%
  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%
  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%

  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
UEFA are banging City for the period 2012-2016, the original reporting period was 2011-2014.

City signed a settlement agreement which dealt with matters up to 2014, but additionally imposed a special UEFA reporting regime with specified targets for the 2014/5 and 2015/6. UEFA then signed us off as having complied with the reporting regime up to the end of 2015/6. Thus, whatever breaches we're accused of, if they come at any point between 2012 and 2016, they involve UEFA reopening reporting periods already expressly closed off.
 
Yep. I even checked with a couple of the others just in case I had misheard and they backed this up. Ceferin apparently said that if we would accept we were guilty of what was described as a "technical accountng breach" we would only suffer a fine.

That does bring into question just how "independent" the Adjudicatory Chamber actually is, if the President can tout deals like that. I also heard from another source however that the G-14 clubs insisted that we get the full 2-season ban. Which just adds to the question about the independence of the CFCB, and even begs the question of whether Ceferin could have ever delivered that deal.

Which is why I've been of the opinion that Ceferin was merely sent to try and coax an admission of guilt so they could give us the 2 year ban with us having nowhere to turn because we'd accepted guilt.
 
It's actually a very good question. If we lose then I'd say it wasn't really irrefutable. But I think the CAS document that gives the reasoning behind their decision may well give us some clues as to what it was.

Is there not an appeal option if we’re found to have breached or is that the highest it can go for ruling??
 
Which is why I've been of the opinion that Ceferin was merely sent to try and coax an admission of guilt so they could give us the 2 year ban with us having nowhere to turn because we'd accepted guilt.
No. If we had accepted we would have expressly denied that we had breached. Discussions would be 'without prejudice' and any agreement would be in writing and watertight.
 
If CAS reject our appeal I can see problems when the mini Chumps League tournament begins in Lisbon.

UEFA will do everything possible to prevent us from winning it.
I’m concerned that there will be a huge groundswell of opinion to expel us immediately and forfeit the tie, in the event of CAS upholding UEFA’svverdict.
 
So it is confirmed, albeit on hearsay evidence only, that a deal was offered. If the offer was another fine then City must be certain, hopefully after considered legal advice, that their evidence is irrefutable otherwise our lawyers would have urged acceptance so I feel a bit more confident (for now anyway) but I still wonder on what basis and or legal advice advice, UEFA felt entitled to impose such a harsh penalty. Whether they admit it or not, they must have had a good idea then of what City’s evidence was, but nevertheless still found City in breach and imposed a 2 year ban. There may or may not have been pressure from G14 or whatever it is, but no amount of political pressure should influence a legal advisor although having said that, who knows when there are millions at stake, or maybe UEFA ignored legal advice.
It does make you think there are layers to this that go beyond what is in the public domain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.