There is substantial material in the CAS findings to refute this rubbish.My WhatsApp group has lit up because of this Forest news, could any of you more intelligent people refute this?
The reason a lot of people think they are guilty is there were leaked documents which UEFA were given which showed there was false accounting (and I think City maybe even admitted to it?). But under UEFA's rules too much time had passed to charge them, whereas the Premier League doesn't have a time limit in its rules.
The CAS found that “leaked email number four is in fact a combination of two separate emails” which gives a “somewhat distorted impression”, and they based their decision on the originals, rather than the hacked versions published by Der Spiegel.
City had said the leaked emails should not be admissible, but still answered the allegations based on them, and eventually agreed to release the original emails – there were six of them and one attachment used, out of around 5.5million hacked emails.
The panel found that the accounts also do not contradict City’s case, and that Uefa had singularly failed to provide any real proof that the Blues had breached FFP rules. They added: “There is no doubt that Etihad fully complied with its payment obligations towards MCFC and that MCFC rendered the contractually agreed services to Etihad in return.”