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.
If the flow of money is clear (and irrefutable) it should go only one way.

We also have the back up of accountants who made up the original rules for UEFA. I'm sure their input as part of the evidence would've been quite compelling, particularly the moving of the goalposts to try and catch us, and only us, out.

P. S did Rick Parry leaving UEFA have anything to do with the case?
 
Whatever CAS decide will likely be fair however, the decision will be technically one man's, there's 3 judges, one picked by City, one by UEFA and one both parties agreed to have.

It's this guy who holds all the power in this case. I suppose both sides will have to trust him & assume he's not been 'bought'.
 
There isn't a jury at CAS so I don't think "guilty by omission" comes into it. And I think the arbiters might probe the point a bit, especially if City's audited accounts and corroborative documents paint a quite different picture. The emails would not be treated as convincing evidence in the face of more "authoritative" evidence which was supported. I remember years ago, and admittedly only in small claims, a case concerned with an overpayment where the employer claimed the severance details had been settled over the phone, a letter sent out to confirm them and then in error an overpayment made. They wanted the overpayment repaid. The client claimed what had been agreed over the phone was what was actually paid, that he had never seen the letter before in his life (it had not been submitted in the bundle of papers before the hearing) and that he was entitled to every penny. The magistrate questioned very closely on who had agreed the deal and why he was not called to appear and why no steps had been taken to ensure that the letter had actually been delivered. In the course of the hearing he made some caustic comments about the presentation of the case which were a fairly clear sign to me that I was certainly not going to lose and in the event he found for my client. I suspect CAS is a long way removed from that but it does show that assumptions, either that 3 months in lieu are all you can get (or in this case City's guilt is self-evident) or that ideas such as "guilt by omission" will not weigh the balance of probabilities in your favour. I think that if its City's accounts + documents v unsupported emails City's lawyers will have enjoyed themselves.
I concur on your last sentence, but this is the crux of an awful lot of debate on here. Are UEFA, having gone through the IC and AC process and then delivering it's sanction, really basing it's whole case on these emails? It's hard to believe that would be the situation, especially with them knowing what the response from City would be and also the CAS procedure to follow.
 
If the club lose at CAS their credibility is pretty shot.

Not just with the media and fans/public, who they've repeatedly told they have irrefutable proof, but also internally. Both Pep and KDB have said the club has all but guaranteed to them that they wont lose.

Pep actually said that he trusts Khaldoon when he says we will be cleared and the implication there is that if we lose, that's either a breach of trust or it's seriously going to dent it.
Without searching for it myself, I thought Pep said 'Khaldoon states we've done nothing wrong' not, 'we will be cleared', which is a subtle but important distinction.
 
Whatever CAS decide will likely be fair however, the decision will be technically one man's, there's 3 judges, one picked by City, one by UEFA and one both parties agreed to have.

It's this guy who holds all the power in this case. I suppose both sides will have to trust him & assume he's not been 'bought'.

Where does this come from? City couldn’t wait to get to CAS. Why would they be in a hurry to go to an organisation with a reputation for being bribed?

Can we stop with this or at least show where CAS have this supposed reputation?

I expect a unanimous decision but a split won’t be an indication of bribery.
 
Without searching for it myself, I thought Pep said 'Khaldoon states we've done nothing wrong' not, 'we will be cleared', which is a subtle but important distinction.

He said the other day -

I have a lot of confidence and trust with the people that we will be allowed to play the Champions League, because we want to be on the field during these years.

And "the people" he was talking about were the club.
 
He said the other day -

I have a lot of confidence and trust with the people that we will be allowed to play the Champions League, because we want to be on the field during these years.

And "the people" he was talking about were the club.
Don't see what that has to do with what I posted TBH.
 
Don't see what that has to do with what I posted TBH.

Really? You can see the subtle distinction between trusting when someone says "we will be cleared" and "we did nothing wrong" but can't understand the significance of trusting "we will play in the CL next season"?

Wilful ignorance I think, Pep's been promised we're in Europe next season, and if we aren't, he's going to feel like his trust and confidence was misplaced.
 
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.