Yes, you‘re probably right. I just had it in my head that we had been asked to produce some documents (perhaps by UEFA rather than CAS?) and by the time the CAS hearing began we had still not given UEFA everything they’d asked for, but CAS ruled the hearing would go ahead regardless.I thought we cooperated fully with CAS, who noted that if we’d given to UEFA what we gave to them there’d have been no basis for UEFA to pursue the charges
Wooooooooshhhhh! lol!Mancini was not there. Don’t believe all you read in the papers!
1460 days to investigate and charge us 115 times, 14 days to collect documents to defend yourself, seems legit.Iirc, the PL in our case has gone straight to a panel, so it is up to Rosen, or the chair if the panel if appointed, to send the complaint to the club. The complaint should list the rules breached, the facts behind them and copies of any documentation supporting those facts. I imagine that has happened. Then the club has 14 days to deny the charges with an answer that must include reasons and copies of relevant documentation. This 14 days can be extended by agreement, and I would imagine it has been.
After that there is a directions hearing to set the thing up, during which both sides can give more information and lists of witnesses and such like are agreed .
Then the chair of the panel sets a time, date and place for the hearing. If you believe the press (and why shouldn't we, they always seem well informed), we are at that stage now.
May all be bollocks :)
Documents are not submitted to CAS/the IC. Documents go to and from the claimant (UEFA and the PL) and the respondent (City) - in this mainly to the claimant from the respondent. The parties then use those documents to make their case to the tribunal (CAS or the IC in the PL case). The tribunal panel is extremely unlikely to look at any document not specifically pointed out to it either in submission or during the trial (say in cross examination). UEFA had more docs by the time CAS came along but the core of the case was on the small number of emails that were leaked. The PL will have many more documents I suspect.
A doubtful Clarkie. It must go to an independent panel, subject to rule 34.5(b).Wooooooooshhhhh! lol!
I go back to my comments they are not about what we have done or what they can prove we have done but about what they are alleging which as I say would be wrong in the real world as well as the fantasy football world you refer to they are accusing us of fraud etcMy comment was to compare real world business with the fantasy world of football , no doubt we have signed up to rules and regulations , surprised clubs like Barca and Real and oursleves have not tested FFP in court , it would be interesting to see that outcome.
The Premier league have bitten off more than they can chew , if they are accusing us of fraud they are going have to gather some compelling evidence not just from our accounts but also our multi-national corporate businesses who are our partners , i dont think any of our sponsors would be willing to open their books to the Premier league and very much doubt they could leagally demand to do this unless again they have compelling evidence. Personally i think this is a fishing expediton by Masters and his cronies , throw 155 charges at us and see how many stick.
The red 'istree clubs have always had the other 18 clubs in their back pocket and Masters' is their puppet master , but the recent vote that allowed loan players to be signed by sister clubs proves the tide is turning the likes of Everton and others have jumped ship and have stood up against the three red c*nts of football clubs.Exactly, if the process isn't independent then it doesn't have any standing because how can it be deemed fair? The Premier League is a football organisation, it isn't an independent auditor or anything else.
A really interesting point is the Premier League is owned 21 ways where each year every league club is given a share and the FA holds the final share (or maybe it's just the 20 clubs, not sure). There is therefore a massive conflict of interest in that actually city have a stake in the very organisation that we're being investigated by, we can even vote against punishing ourselves.
The Premier League gets around this conflict by having a three person independent panel conduct breach investigations but who is this panel appointed by and what expertise do they hold? Nobody knows. They also can only consider any evidence put in front of them which might not be so damning but again nobody actually knows.
At the moment we have to accept this process for what it is however the big challenge will come afterwards if the end result is bad. Everything then comes down to litigation and legal process which I can see being dragged out for 10+ years. The other clubs will have to pay millions in costs to defend against that.
With this in mind and given the unlimited resources that city have, personally if I was the Premier League and city offered to settle the matter quietly and privately then I'd settle!
Agree , Gill and Parry held prominent postitions and we all know their allegiances , even Platini recommended there was an investigation at UEFA for all the leaks , but it never happened.The way I see it is this - City didn’t trust handing over sensitive information to UEFA as the club felt that it could fall into the hands of our competitors, but we trusted handing it over to CAS.
I doubt it , Mancini only met with Khaldoon and Mansour for the first time two weeks before he was offered the job for us.