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

[Dirty Harry]

I made a thread, amazingly it seems to have taken off and people like it. If you have a spare 3 mins, feel free to give it a read. Just my observations based on the facts of the 93 page report. No agenda bullshit

That's excellent and to the point mate, thank you.

 

[tornandfrayed]

What I still can't get my head round is that CAS found we'd failed to co-operate with UEFA yet also found that we'd done nothing wrong concerning what they were investigating us for anyway.

I'd assume we refused to co-operate originally on the grounds that the emails were stolen, which isn't in dispute, therefore UEFA had no right to use them as evidence anyway. While CAS ultimately determined that they were allowed to rely on them, there was clearly a valid legal question as to their admissibility. CAS even said our lawyers were justified in vigorously defending our non-cooperation stance.

Had we refused to submit supporting evidence for our annual FFP return despite numerous requests, for example, then that would plainly justify a non-cooperation charge and significant fine. But we didn't.

In that case, I don't see how CAS were right to uphold the non co-operation charge and impose such a significant fine. I'd have expected CAS to say that while we certainly initially refused to co-operate, we genuinely felt we had a valid, legal right not to do so, on the grounds that the emails were stolen and presented out of context. Having produced the required evidence at CAS, which was agreed with UEFA, they should have dropped that charge in my view.

I think I'm the only one on here who doesn't hold CAS in particularly high regard. As far as I'm concerned they are part of the corrupt system of international sporting bodies and have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

 

[mrbelfry]

What I still can't get my head round is that CAS found we'd failed to co-operate with UEFA yet also found that we'd done nothing wrong concerning what they were investigating us for anyway.

I'd assume we refused to co-operate originally on the grounds that the emails were stolen, which isn't in dispute, therefore UEFA had no right to use them as evidence anyway. While CAS ultimately determined that they were allowed to rely on them, there was clearly a valid legal question as to their admissibility. CAS even said our lawyers were justified in vigorously defending our non-cooperation stance.

Had we refused to submit supporting evidence for our annual FFP return despite numerous requests, for example, then that would plainly justify a non-cooperation charge and significant fine. But we didn't.

In that case, I don't see how CAS were right to uphold the non co-operation charge and impose such a significant fine. I'd have expected CAS to say that while we certainly initially refused to co-operate, we genuinely felt we had a valid, legal right not to do so, on the grounds that the emails were stolen and presented out of context. Having produced the required evidence at CAS, which was agreed with UEFA, they should have dropped that charge in my view.

My take is that CAS were annoyed that we kept some info back to present at CAS. Info that if UEFA had had might have meant the trip to CAS was unnecessary. So we should have sorted it out between us and we basically got done for playing silly buggers

CAS have to reaffirm the investigatory body otherwise everything would just go straight to CAS.

 

[Asa's left peg]

From a CAS point of view they must be getting fed up of ruling against UEFA or getting them to understand their own rules. Did someone on here say UEFA have lost cases or had the penalties significantly reduced?
Sooner or later someone has to ask the question, is it the rules or how they are being used - or both?

I'll just stand over here and hold my breath.

 

[Bollington Blue]

My take is that CAS were annoyed that we kept some info back to present at CAS. Info that if UEFA had had might have meant the trip to CAS was unnecessary. So we should have sorted it out between us and we basically got done for playing silly buggers

CAS have to reaffirm the investigatory body otherwise everything would just go straight to CAS.

If that's the case, why did we have to pay UEFA the fine and not to CAS?

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

People withdrew from Twitter because of the approach to ant-semitism and the Wiley stuff.

Cheers. Wasn't aware of that.

 

[Blueknows]

Looking at paragraphs 294 & 295, it seems that by refusing to co-operate with UEFA at any stage means the club breeched article 56 of FFP.
Whether CAS thought we might have been acting reasonably to defend our position, it's a black-or-white decision in that at some point we did fail to cooperate.

And the reasons we didnt cooperate ?...........first and foremost we knew we were innocent and that it was clear that someone in the IC was leaking information to the press , it wouldnt suprise me if we appealed the fine

 

[Keith Moon]

What I still can't get my head round is that CAS found we'd failed to co-operate with UEFA yet also found that we'd done nothing wrong concerning what they were investigating us for anyway.

I'd assume we refused to co-operate originally on the grounds that the emails were stolen, which isn't in dispute, therefore UEFA had no right to use them as evidence anyway. While CAS ultimately determined that they were allowed to rely on them, there was clearly a valid legal question as to their admissibility. CAS even said our lawyers were justified in vigorously defending our non-cooperation stance.

Had we refused to submit supporting evidence for our annual FFP return despite numerous requests, for example, then that would plainly justify a non-cooperation charge and significant fine. But we didn't.

In that case, I don't see how CAS were right to uphold the non co-operation charge and impose such a significant fine. I'd have expected CAS to say that while we certainly initially refused to co-operate, we genuinely felt we had a valid, legal right not to do so, on the grounds that the emails were stolen and presented out of context. Having produced the required evidence at CAS, which was agreed with UEFA, they should have dropped that charge in my view.

UEFA won the non co-operation charge 2-1

 

[blue oli]

I made a thread, amazingly it seems to have taken off and people like it. If you have a spare 3 mins, feel free to give it a read. Just my observations based on the facts of the 93 page report. No agenda bullshit

This gets my award for ‘best thread on the subject’ really clear and factual - thank you

 

[Blueknows]

From a CAS point of view they must be getting fed up of ruling against UEFA or getting them to understand their own rules. Did someone on here say UEFA have lost cases or had the penalties significantly reduced?
Sooner or later someone has to ask the question, is it the rules or how they are being used - or both?

I'll just stand over here and hold my breath.

Along with ourselves PSG and Chelsea have all won recent CAS appeals against uefa....the cartel dont like change do they