CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

[BillyShears]

Also on the PL coming after us.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

He has been good on this since last Christmas. Before that he, and the Times, were swallowing the UEFA line and were one of the recipients of leaks. I believe that they eventually realised they were being used to spread misinformation and since then their coverage has been mostly balanced and accurate. One of the leaks (from UEFA) about City facing a ban was shortly before Ceferin's trip to the Etihad. I don't think that was a co-incidence.

Yes, it suggests that initially they printed what they were told (fine, as long as it's clear that it's briefing).
At some point, presumably they asked the other side, or decided to look into it. SInce then, Ziegler's been solid.

Always difficult to remember how much one journalist is responsible for output, but I do recall his using his own twitter about this.

 

[iwasthere1968]

Now might be the time to revisit the hateful 8 letter , it would be interesting to see the wording in the light of yesterday's verdict.
Anyone got it ?

 

[slicky202]

G Nev out here talking absolute sense, fair play to the twat:

'I said a few months ago, FFP would have prevented Jack Walker doing what he did 30 years ago at Blackburn,' he added.



'It's fundamentally wrong that there are restrictions placed on owners to put money into football clubs. Whether it's Chelsea, Man City or Blackburn, all those stories we've had in the Premier League over the last 20 years or so, the addition to challenging Manchester United, Arsenal and other clubs wouldn't have happened if FFP had been implemented in its truest form"

'I don't believe it's right. There has always been rich owners investing into football clubs and that won't change today. FFP needs changing to a different model.'

Restricting people in this way feels to me as the Americans would say “unconstitutional” there’s just something at its very essence that sounds wrong. That’s before you take into consideration that established clubs looking out for their own interests Find it financially unbearable . It’s just wrong at it’s very core imo

 

[jaiguruKun]

Unfortunately Henry Winter's article is yet another example of clicks being more valuable than reporting facts. None of these hacks seem to have the sense to wait until the full reasons are published before rushing to judgement.

I suspect that the strength of our case against the time-barred allegations was just as strong as for those that weren't but because they were time-barred CAS did not need to waste its time considering them.

 

[Dobsy]

There certainly seems to be an urge to recast "some charges excluded due to being timebarred" into "technical get-out so not innocent".

Also the weaselly "in breach of FFP regs" which is technically true, even though it's not a financial breach.

Yes, the statement said the breaches were "either not established or time barred" with no reference to the balance. It could be 90% not established, 10% time barred.

But it's being reported as 100% time barred with the implication it was established. "The breaches were time barred so they got off on a technicality".

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

City as a general rule don't lie. If they knew on Friday, then that would've been via an official communication from CAS, and they'd have no reason to deny it today or to 'leave this version out there'. It's a COMPLETE non issue which is only really relevant in places where people made bold predictions on Friday.

I am sure City didn't lie but there is a difference between a preliminary briefing to lawyers and the official announcement. I agree it is a complete non issue.

 

[Cobwebcat]

The PL can't and won't do anything to City. That story will quietly disappear into the ether over the coming weeks.

Look at it like this - City's intransigence to the charges brought by UEFA made them go to war rather than seek ANY kind of settlement. The PL will absolutely NOT want to have one of it's top stakeholders going to war with it over historic financial issues when the club is so well run financially and so financially powerful.

Personally I think that every single reference I've seen to PL charges since yesterday's ruling is about appeasing the dumbest rival supporters who will cling to any hope that City are going to be 'stopped' by football's authorities.

Tend to agree on the FFP stuff and god knows why it would take them over 18 months to rule on Academy or third party ownership issues.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

City as a general rule don't lie. If they knew on Friday, then that would've been via an official communication from CAS, and they'd have no reason to deny it today or to 'leave this version out there'. It's a COMPLETE non issue which is only really relevant in places where people made bold predictions on Friday.

Yes, I don't see a reason to believe they knew before yesterday morning. Given the allegations made against UEFA leaking, leaking themselves would have been stupid - as such, I bet this was locked down as tightly as possible.

I'm quite surprised the fuller judgement will apparently be out this week.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

The very first thing that CAS said was that City did not disguise equity funding as sponsorship income. That was the entire reason we were there, the main charge against us. Yet you are hard pressed to find any mention of it in reports. It’s all about “technicality” and “time-barred“ and “not enough conclusive evidence, not ‘no evidence’”. The narrative is still one of guilt despite an unequivocal statement of innocence from CAS in regards to financial irregularity.