CAS find Manchester City not proven guilty. Meaning evidence hadn't been presented to prove the charges had been acted out beyond emails. UEFA's charges were ONLY,,,, that Manchester city had acted upon the ideas of breaking regulations mooted in emails. I haven't seen the emails, BUT I've no doubt some conversations would suggest ideas that would break regulations that should not be acted upon according to the rules of football organisations, and more importantly to the laws of several countries,) THAT SHOULD NOT be acted upon). This type of discussion takes place in ALL companies around the world.
Every day of the year a quantity surveyor will have a subcontractor wanting to transgress building regulations. The QS would point out to the subcontractor that in the contract with the contractor had a binding contractual obligation to carry out any work according to government regulations. The subcontractor would be trying to save money on the the contract by cutting corners. Every single business in the world has conversations internally were various departments interact so as to establish how close they can sail to regulation while satisfying the profit making, and contractual obligations.
These SPITBALLING emails, I kid you not, from what I have learnt so far is the ONLY evidence UEFA had of accusing several companies and several sets of auditors of carrying out international accountancy fraud which would ultimately be tax fraud, in several countries, and jeopardising for Sheikh Mansour himself a sports empire including 14 teams. All this over piddling little amounts of 30 or so million, jeopardising 10 billions of investment in many different companies including Sheikh Mansour's and several other companies?
UEFA did not charge Manchester City breaking fair market value. And finally said they were fair.
UEFA did not charge Manchester City of financial doping.
UEFA did not charge Manchester City of breaking ANY other regulations.
Now the UEFA charges are pretty much the same as the Premier League charges, and based upon the same evidence as above. UEFA charges cover the period ?? to ??. The PL charges cover 2009/10 to 2017/18. the 2 periods overlap. I court has already been presented with no evidence that Manchester City actually carried out any breaking of legal or sports associations regulations. The emails weren't adequate evidence. So at least timewise that is 50% of the Premier Leagues charges blown out of the water, at least at that time period of that overlap.
"Time barring" I hear people shout. The problem is, the charges of the period after time barring are exactly the same as the charges before time barring. So MCSE carried out all their dirty deals before time barring, and the Premier league will have evidence for that period. What evidence is there beyond the emails? NONE!
UEFA has also found since then all the sponsoring companies were indeed not too closely legally related to Sheikh Mansour.
The Court of arbitration CAS, however did find that UEFA had breached its own guidelines in the investigation and in the many leaks to the press. Sound any different to the PL?
