PSG set to fail FFP again?

[Fred_Quimby]

60,000 booing the anthem in front of TV Audience of billions would do it.

And that is why EUFA will ensure it will never happen .

 

[Blue Hefner]

That leaves them with the cherry but no decent cake to sit on

I posted that 7 months ago. I wasn’t expecting it to be quoted.......Any news on PSG’s ins and outs?

 

[M12Blue]

I posted that 7 months ago. I wasn’t expecting it to be quoted.......Any news on PSG’s ins and outs?

Sorry mate, not quoted, great minds ......
PSG - no idea, I’m a manc working out here

 

[Parisian]

Interesting that for a similar case to the Galatasaray, the TAS is yet to give his verdict (after two weeks) about the "vice de forme" in the reopening of FFP investigation for the 2015/2016/2017 years.

 

[aguero93:20]

Interesting that for a similar case to the Galatasaray, the TAS is yet to give his verdict (after two weeks) about the "vice de forme" in the reopening of FFP investigation for the 2015/2016/2017 years.

Probably because it's a first, FFPR is fairly recent after all.

 

[Parisian]

The thing is, like Galatasaray, PSG didn't reach for the TAS for the FFP per se. Both clubs have pointed out that UEFA bodies have not respected their own rules that state they need to issue their decision (investigation) 10 days after the previous ruling. It is then for a "vice de forme". How hard is it, when you have already seen the same case with UEFA failing to respect their own rules, to give a verdict for a similar case ?

 

[hello]

The thing is, like Galatasaray, PSG didn't reach for the TAS for the FFP per se. Both clubs have pointed out that UEFA bodies have not respected their own rules that state they need to issue their decision (investigation) 10 days after the previous ruling. It is then for a "vice de forme". How hard is it, when you have already seen the same case with UEFA failing to respect their own rules, to give a verdict for a similar case ?

UEFA are quite happy to rewrite their own rules before issuing a statement/judgement, form changing an annex to blatantly ignoring their own protocols as in the VAR Schalke broken screen fiasco.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The thing is, like Galatasaray, PSG didn't reach for the TAS for the FFP per se. Both clubs have pointed out that UEFA bodies have not respected their own rules that state they need to issue their decision (investigation) 10 days after the previous ruling. It is then for a "vice de forme". How hard is it, when you have already seen the same case with UEFA failing to respect their own rules, to give a verdict for a similar case ?

And CAS have found in PSG's favour on this.

I wonder if this has any impact on their investigation into our pre-2014 situation?

 

[Henkeman]

And CAS have found in PSG's favour on this.

I wonder if this has any impact on their investigation into our pre-2014 situation?

I suppose it depends on the grounds for it - whether it's procedural or a matter of substance in terms of re-opening a closed enquiry. If the latter, then UEFA are stuffed.

 

[Parisian]

And CAS have found in PSG's favour on this.

I wonder if this has any impact on their investigation into our pre-2014 situation?

Was going to post that but you beat me to it.

All those months to give the same decision they gave on Galatasaray case...

PS: Well, PSG appealed according to a breach of rules by UEFA FFP bodies. I have read the article related to this and there is no clear text for the City case. In PSG case, they wanted to reopen an investigation they had already ruled without new elements (and they did not respect the delay).
In City case, they said they allow themselves to reopen a case that has already been investigated if there are new elements of wrongdoing not known at the time of the ruling. I don't know if this is possible with their "lax rules" but it is different from PSG.