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

[BlueAnorak]

Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time. For their sake I hope the Adjudicatory Chamber doesn't try to be the prosecution and judges at the same time.

 

[nmc]

Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time.

This is great. The investigatory chamber clearly did not hear our case but decided there was a case to answer ? That’s going to be difficult to defend later because UEFA have clearly not conducted a proper investigation if they haven’t involved City (and the club have confirmed they didn’t contact us and did not read the dossier we prepared). Having passed our case to the adjudicatory chamber (with a clear indication of guilt) we are asked to present our case - given we’ve been recommended for punishment isn’t this upside down - shouldn’t UEFA be the prosecution presenting their case to which we respond? I honestly think we’ve got uefa on the run and once we have cleared our name we should pursue them for deformation given the persistent leaks to the NYT et al which are all attributed to them. It’ll be interesting to see if we can get our foot on UEFS’s throat whether they disclose which clubs were driving this and the nature of the treats and underhand tactics. I honestly think the tied is turning in our favour here.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

This is great. The investigatory chamber clearly did not hear our case but decided there was a case to answer ? That’s going to be difficult to defend later because UEFA have clearly not conducted a proper investigation if they haven’t involved City (and the club have confirmed they didn’t contact us and did not read the dossier we prepared). Having passed our case to the adjudicatory chamber (with a clear indication of guilt) we are asked to present our case - given we’ve been recommended for punishment isn’t this upside down - shouldn’t UEFA be the prosecution presenting their case to which we respond? I honestly think we’ve got uefa on the run and once we have cleared our name we should pursue them for deformation given the persistent leaks to the NYT et al which are all attributed to them. It’ll be interesting to see if we can get our foot on UEFS’s throat whether they disclose which clubs were driving this and the nature of the treats and underhand tactics. I honestly think the tied is turning in our favour here.

Still need to get the rest of the machine at least being impartial, as I don’t see them being on our side.
Too much money involved for all.
I’m talking about TV companies, the media in general. PL. the FA.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time. For their sake I hope the Adjudicatory Chamber doesn't try to be the prosecution and judges at the same time.

When you say "it's bound to leak", I think Rick Parry has left UEFA now to become Chairman of the EFL so maybe it won't. Indeed, the lack of leaks since September is telling in itself.

As for the rest of it. As you say, if true, it's an abuse of process. Charge within 5 years to beat the deadline and then start the investigation proper. It's such an abuse, putting UEFA in such a bind, I can't believe it really is the case.

 

[KS55]

Hilarious, UEFA are allowing us to present our case. Clearly an admission that they should have allowed us to present our case to the Investigatory Chamber.
It will be interesting to see how UEFA play this. Are they inventing new rules as they go along?
I await the point by point rebuttal by City (which is bound to leak). I then await to know if the rebuttal is being presented to the judges of the adjudicatory chamber or then are they asking City to present and are they also asking the Investigatory Chamber to rebutt City's reply and then are they allowing City to make comments on the rebuttal?
It is clear that UEFA have messed up big time. For their sake I hope the Adjudicatory Chamber doesn't try to be the prosecution and judges at the same time.

Sorry, have i missed a new development?
EDIT SORRY, found the ref to it now. Ignore me!

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

When you say "it's bound to leak", I think Rick Parry has left UEFA now to become Chairman of the EFL so maybe it won't. Indeed, the lack of leaks since September is telling in itself.

As for the rest of it. As you say, if true, it's an abuse of process. Charge within 5 years to beat the deadline and then start the investigation proper. It's such an abuse, putting UEFA in such a bind, I can't believe it really is the case.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.

 

[BlueAnorak]

When you say "it's bound to leak", I think Rick Parry has left UEFA now to become Chairman of the EFL so maybe it won't. Indeed, the lack of leaks since September is telling in itself.

As for the rest of it. As you say, if true, it's an abuse of process. Charge within 5 years to beat the deadline and then start the investigation proper. It's such an abuse, putting UEFA in such a bind, I can't believe it really is the case.

A good point. That said Parry isn't the only possible leak meister.

 

[Newman Noggs]

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.

Even if they don't ban or fine us, clearing us is the one outcome that will never happen precisely for the reason you describe but also, because they know the media shitstorm would be unrelenting. The media would never tolerate being proved to be wrong.

 

[nmc]

A good point. That said Parry isn't the only possible leak meister.

There’s some evidence that UEFA leak many of their impending announcements to the AP a few days in advance. Not sure why but they often do.

 

[BlueAnorak]

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the case dropped on a technicality that process wasn’t followed in time for the 5 years timeline and guilt will still be implied in the media.

If I was UEFA I'd just state that the Investigatory Chamber had messed up and hadn't followed the process correctly and as such the Adjucicary Chamber were dropping the charges.
Publically, City would be shown to have got away with it on a technicality and I'm not sure City could do anything about it.