UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST

[bluethai]

You not even trying are you. This is essentially a regional paper. Maybe 1 in every 1,000 who reads the times will actually bother to read the article. It's a "well I've heard" story, nothing more. The fact that you pumping up it's value gives the impression that aren't and never have been a blue.

Agreed

 

[SWP's back]

Unfortunately, UEFA are currently allied much more closely to Qatar than the UAE.

And guess who don’t like each other very much?

UAE doesn’t like Qatar. Not vice versa. It’s the UAE that’s imposing an illegal ground, air and sea blockade on Qatar. Flying from Qatar to South Africa now takes an hour and a half longer.

And it’s entirely on the fault of the UAE for being KSA’s woman on this.

 

[yeseye]

Here’s how it will pan out.

a. City kicked out.
b. Arsenal ‘win’ europa league.
c. Utd shoe horned in to replace us.

 

[nmc]

Interesting isn’t it that we beat a club whose owner is American and now a new scoop has appeared, in the New York Times no less, saying we’re going to be banned.

Well get it over with you ****s; enjoy having a champions competition without the champions of the strongest league in the world.

Well they’ve got a CL final 8this year with two teams who didn’t get within 25 points of the title last year - hardly credible but the media won’t report that.

 

[nmc]

Seems pretty obvious UEFA are doing this simply because they feel they *have* to or FFP loses all credibility as being enforceable, especially in the eyes of the the traditional elite clubs who UEFA are so reliant on and seem to be the rocket fuel for this whole thing.

UEFA also know that the ruling is legally unenforceable at CAS given the frail evidence but simply have no alternative than to be seen to pursue this tough sanctioning for the above reason. We meanwhile are aware we can successfully challenge the ruling at CAS but also are fully aware that there is a difference between a positive legal outcome and coming away with a positive public perception, the latter of which - let's face it - is pretty much the reason Abu Dhabi bought us in the first place.

Ultimately, disregarding that FFP is a sham concotion by the traditional elite to close the threat of legitimate new competition, and that these latest leaks are not legally incrimintating, they nevertheless are enough to prove in the court of public perception that we diddled the FFP numbers, particularly when coupled with the lack of denials we've heard from the club hierarchy itself.

So basically it's all heading towards a damaging CAS battle that will further greatly hurt our public image, UEFA's pockets and ultimately FFP's credibility, but also that neither party is currently able to get away from. Best guess is a lot of tough guy posturing for the next few months, followed by the very beginnings of a court battle, swiftly followed by an out of court settlement "punishment" without prejudice for us which we will ensure has no tangible impact on our progress.

Normally I’d agree but we’ve been down that road... taken a pinch but it wasn’t the end of it; so I don’t see how our owners can do a deal with an organisation as weak and corrupt as UEFA.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Talk about an "agenda." This is posted without context.

NY Times sold their shares years ago.



Let's not contribute to the same problem we rail against ourselves.

Quite right. From now on could people please refer to the NYT as "former" major shareholder in Liverpool FC.

 

[manimanc]

How much will it affect our revenue if we're banned from CL for a season ? What likely effect will it have on our transfers ?

Absolutely none as we're already spuds deep for a couple of players already.
Don't worry my blue friend.

 

[KS55]

It was the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that decided PSG's fate. They sided with PSG by stating that any previous sanctions were, in their own words, "final and binding". UEFA CANNOT impose sanctions over matters for which a settlement has already taken place. We may have to pursue the matter through CAS but would ultimately win.

I'm not sure that this is correct. If UEFA's case is that our previous settlement was finalised based on false evidence given by us, it is likely that they will be allowed to revisit it. Alternatively, if they can prove that our evidence was false, they can simply sanction us for lying, without re opening the old case.

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

I can't it all - I assume that says something along the lines of J W Henry is second largest shareholder of the NYT?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

If you read the NY Times article, which I am sure you have, it's interesting that they say the focus of the UEFA investigation has shifted from financial 'irregularity' to misleading information. I think that was the only thing significant in the article.

I doubt whether City have communicated or assisted UEFA's investigation, preferring to keep our powder dry.

I agree. This is the key point, and the rest is just noise for now.
I'm sure that the reporting about UEFA lawyers not being convinced they can make it stick is true.