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

[tweety]

The scribblers and commentators virtually to a man nailed their colour's to the Uefa mast. Apart from maybe Martin Samuel, not one of them knows the ins and outs of ffp.
How on earth can you pontificate about City when you haven't a clue about the subject.
The only time I get to hear their mutterings is when I come onto Bluemoon and that's the way it'll stay, I don't buy a newspaper or subscribe to sky.
There's a great story in this for a journalist to unravel but I won't hold my breath waiting for one.

 

[lancs blue]

Excellent that pal, well done.
Amazing that once again, City fans are running absolute rings around people who are paid a salary to understand and present this stuff to the public in a balanced and accurate manner.

One of the problems with the football media, aside from the bias, is that some lack the capacity to understand the detail in a document like the CAS verdict and they resort to cherry-picking bite-sized phrases.

 

[BoyataIsGod]

I am not really sure why there is still a debate surrounding the verdict, i expected it from opposition fans but still some of the mainstream media harps on about the unfairness of it all. The club were able to demonstrate to a panel of 3 independent judges that the 'crimes' they were accused of were in fact total and utter rubbish. The verdict clearly an unequivocally states that the club DID NOT funnel money through inflated sponsorship, the club DID fall foul of not cooperating with the investigation which under the circumstance seems to have been vindicated given the verdict from CAS.

I am also loving the fact that opposition fans seem to think despite the CAS ruling that our 'reputation is now in tatters' like we or any of our hierarchy give a horses arse what salty part time fans from Liverpool and Salford think of us.The matter is finished the club have had to undertake an exercise to disprove the mad theories of a group of clubs who are quite clearly s******g themselves about what is being built. Unlucky UEFA, Tebas, the G7 and those small clubs who decided to get involved (Burnley being my personal favourite, what the fcuk has it got to do with them LOL).

 

[JRockBlues]

One thing I find quite telling is that none of the media seemed to mention that we still have an ongoing complaint to UEFA's disciplinary body about the leaks from the Investigatory Chamber. I mentioned this in a reply to the last part of Tricky_Trev's twitter thread. Probably because they don't delve too deeply into the reason for the reduced fine that we received.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

Let's look at it another way. Der Spiegel publish 6 emails, one of which has been doctored and all of which have been stolen. We always refused to acknowledge the veracity of those emails, on the grounds that they were stolen. We clearly felt, on legal advice, that we had good grounds for refusing to co-operate on the grounds of "fruit of the poisoned tree".

Let's suppose that Der Spiegel had published some completely fictitious emails, including one allegedly from Sheikh Mansour saying he'd pay the money for the Etihad sponsorship. UEFA arrive at the Etihad demanding to investigate. We could say the emails are fictitious and they'd say "Prove it". To do so, we'd have to let them have access to all our emails in order to prove that the ones they have we're fictitious and simply didn't exist. It's a complete nonsense.

The emails were stolen. Der Spiegel published them and claimed public interest although they knew some related to a period either prior to FFP and we know now that some relate to periods that were time-barred and/or covered by our 2014 settlement agreement. We had every right not to co-operate, otherwise it sets a precedent that anyone can manufacture an email, get it published in the media then demand access to legitimate evidence on the basis of that fake email.

I'm convinced the club will take this further. Clause 56 is written so widely that it's almost impossible not to fall foul of it even for the most minor infractions. We had a legitimate right not to co-operate in my opinion and we should defend that.

There was a Pep press conference where he was asked about the non-cooperation fine, and after saying that it’s a question for the lawyers, he did reveal that the lawyers told him that “we did not do what they say we did”, so it does sound like they have been waiting for the full report to see how they can contest the non-cooperation charge.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

A few people had requested for it to be “unrolled”, which basically puts it all together as an article, rather than lots of separate tweets. The link is here, and you can save it as a pdf with the button at the top. Cheers mate!

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1288510539400978433.html

Right up there with the best posts ever on this subject. Concise, coherent and unarguable in my view.

 

[dickie davies]

UEFA's authority is weakened. I am not sure if this is a good thing because the G14 clubs, who were probabaly responsible for the lynch mob atmosphere in the first place, are not going to go away.

Patience Padawan, I suspect that things are afoot following our couple of meetings with Ceferin. Surely there must be changes in UEFA now with the likes of Leterme toast. We also won't have a clue on what City are planning until Kool Hand speaks, who may give us a hint or two.

One thing I find quite telling is that none of the media seemed to mention that we still have an ongoing complaint to UEFA's disciplinary body about the leaks from the Investigatory Chamber. I mentioned this in a reply to the last part of Tricky_Trev's twitter thread. Probably because they don't delve too deeply into the reason for the reduced fine that we received.

@Marvin , as pointed out by the other two honourable posters, surely this means that the old G14's position is weakened
Ceferin can rally every ally he has and if the ethics committee has the balls to get to the route of the leaks then heads will roll

 

[Corky]

There was a Pep press conference where he was asked about the non-cooperation fine, and after saying that it’s a question for the lawyers, he did reveal that the lawyers told him that “we did not do what they say we did”, so it does sound like they have been waiting for the full report to see how they can contest the non-cooperation charge.

They have already been contested through Cas. If City don't pay up after the binding decision I would imagine Uefa won't let us in their competition that the club is desperate to be in.

 

[Rochdale Blue]

I am not really sure why there is still a debate surrounding the verdict, i expected it from opposition fans but still some of the mainstream media harps on about the unfairness of it all. The club were able to demonstrate to a panel of 3 independent judges that the 'crimes' they were accused of were in fact total and utter rubbish. The verdict clearly an unequivocally states that the club DID NOT funnel money through inflated sponsorship, the club DID fall foul of not cooperating with the investigation which under the circumstance seems to have been vindicated given the verdict from CAS.

I am also loving the fact that opposition fans seem to think despite the CAS ruling that our 'reputation is now in tatters' like we or any of our hierarchy give a horses arse what salty part time fans from Liverpool and Salford think of us.The matter is finished the club have had to undertake an exercise to disprove the mad theories of a group of clubs who are quite clearly s******g themselves about what is being built. Unlucky UEFA, Tebas, the G7 and those small clubs who decided to get involved (Burnley being my personal favourite, what the fcuk has it got to do with them LOL).

The media journos have constantly slated City fans for defending the club, they claimed we should stop being over defensive and meekly accept the clubs guilt instead of mounting a sustained attack on certain press members who were only seeking and writing the truth. Many also claimed they would apologise if the club was cleared of ffp misdemeanours but it seems most have been busy mowing the lawn for the past few days.

 

[give it to gordon]

Yes that was one of the points that CAS made re the non-cooperation fine.

I don't see how CAS, as a court of appeal and arbitration, could be seen to condone or validate non-cooperation with a governing body, regardless of the reasons. It would just set a potentially bad precedent for other cases.

Yea I think City knew the non cooperation part would be up held because we did just that City didnt cooperate with UEFA.
The question and investigation should now be carried out into why City felt it was unsafe to comply with UEFA. Why was there so many leaks coming out of UEFA. Why did UEFA think that few hacked and doctored emails was worth a 2 yr ban and 30 million fine.