Champions League ban?

[aguero93:20]

It is my understanding that CAS is used only after ALL other forms of mediation have been exhausted.

No. Sion have used it in the past to appeal against an unfair ban, bans are time sensitive so there's no reason you couldn't go straight to CAS.

 

[Henkeman]

It is my understanding that CAS is used only after ALL other forms of mediation have been exhausted.

It's also questionable whether CAS would be the route City would go down if it came to it. They make judgements on sporting issues, not matters like restraint of trade, anti-competitive behaviour and so forth.

 

[blueunlimited]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-uefa-officials-der-spiegel?CMP=share_btn_tw

Good article.

 

[aguero93:20]

It's also questionable whether CAS would be the route City would go down if it came to it. They make judgements on sporting issues, not matters like restraint of trade, anti-competitive behaviour and so forth.

They've already ruled that AC Milan's ban was disproportionate for losing 100m in one season with a positive trend.

 

[Henkeman]

They've already ruled that AC Milan's ban was disproportionate for losing 100m in one season with a positive trend.

Yes, indeed - but that is about the fairness of the rules having accepted the legitimacy of those rules. What I'm saying is that City may not go down that route.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

None of the ****s want City to win the CL but they all want debt-ridden Real Madrid to win it every year. What sense does that make? Wankers/

 

[Marvin]

We are accused of false accounting or inflating our UAE deals. The only one of significance that affects the current game is the Etihad deal at £67.5m pa. I think most observers would accept the UAE finance amounts to around £80m pa with the Etihad worth 80% of it.

This stems from the Der Spiegel email claims which suggest that City routed about £50m (I forget the exact figure now) through AUG.

Two points about this:

1) Etihad claim they are fully liable for this
2) Are a section of the media who have appointed themselves as self-appointed judges, seriously going to believe that MCFC, Premier League Champions of England, are going to accept a sponsorship deal involving stadium and shirt rights for approx. £10m pa? Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[aguero93:20]

Yes, indeed - but that is about the fairness of the rules having accepted the legitimacy of those rules. What I'm saying is that City may not go down that route.

Unfortunately it's more than likely we accepted the rules themselves in 2014 when we accepted our settlement. Let's see how the fan case goes in Belgium in February.

 

[Fred_Quimby]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-uefa-officials-der-spiegel?CMP=share_btn_tw

Good article.

So, storm - teacup springs to mind.

 

[Henkeman]

Unfortunately it's more than likely we accepted the rules themselves in 2014 when we accepted our settlement. Let's see how the fan case goes in Belgium in February.

Well, I don't want to go too far down this route, as it's a fairly esoteric subject, but I would very much doubt that City have failed in the most basic of legal avenues of reserving their right to challenge the rules under which they operate.