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

[Newman Noggs]

I would like to think that, if we are forced into a position where we have to appeal, the appeal grounds will be extended to include the fundamental corruption lying behind the introduction of FFP in the first place. Get Platini, Gill, Rumenigga, Parry et al into the box to explain how the original intention of FFP to control debt was subverted by their clubs as described by Platini in his interview with Martin Samuel (Exhibit 1)

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

Flagrant disregard for authority lol.

There's some fucking morons about.

How dare they try and defend themselves.

 

[Bald fraud]

You must go in some strange pubs, I work with fans of lots of clubs, and none has ever mentioned it to me not even the rags (don't have any liverpool colleagues currently).

Mainly cocktail bars really

 

[Newman Noggs]

Apart from CAS saying the leaks are "worrisome", what else is there in these latest reports to suggest it could go our way? I can't really see anything?

Apart from anything else, the question is why UEFA permitted the leaks. It's against their own ethical code, every investigative code known to man and is unprecedented. Once you know why, you can understand that it was never a fair enquiry, that people on the inside had vested (and, we'd argue, commercial) interests in damaging our brand and the results of any such enquiry cannot be relied on. It's a major issue for UEFA.

 

[chaddblue]

Apart from anything else, the question is why UEFA permitted the leaks. It's against their own ethical code, every investigative code known to man and is unprecedented. Once you know why, you can understand that it was never a fair enquiry, that people on the inside had vested (and, we'd argue, commercial) interests in damaging our brand and the results of any such enquiry cannot be relied on. It's a major issue for UEFA.

Thanks for explaining that. Yeah I can see it now

 

[yerwot?]

english media long ago abandoned "reporting", those at the top, murdoch and co. dictate the narrative and the editor sticks to the script, sometimes the script is "ignore", sometimes spin/twist/lies. Public opinion is shamelessly manipulated by those we rely on to be honest and impartial, but those days are long gone. Fifa/Uefa/Fa/Prem....nine-bob notes the lot of them...

 

[SilverFox2]

Leterme denied that the source of the leak was either himself or anyone on the CFCB. A very careful choice of words that.

They are beginning to regret the culture of hubris and arrogance that typified their standard remarks to media.
Possibly the start of payback time that Joe Mercer would have been proud of.p

 

[ganganvince]

When has pingu ever talked?

He did mutter a lot but wasn't coherent.
Pingu As A Chef - Pingu Official Channel

 

[bluetonium]

Read again and a few more bits worth highlighting.

UEFA reopened the case into us following leaks from Der Spiegel, Reuters and Mediapart. That was the basis for them feeling able to do so desire our previous agreement and the time limit on reopening.

CAS feel that our allegation that UEFA themselves, or an associated and interested party with conflicting interests to those of Manchester City, facilitated these leaks, to enable them to reopen their case, is not without merit.

They also state that the Chief Investigator's comments on dismissing our concerns when raised out of hand were puzzling. That is because he or his organisation were accused of leaking information (the articles states specifically from a UEFA source) and thus the whole process was broken, and he didn't blink an eye, or start an internal investigation or even refer to any processes to prevent such circumstances. He was confident enough to just dismiss it out of hand, without explaining or asking questions of his own organisation, to what is actually a pretty serious allegation.

The biggest issue for us, and the CAS document states this specifically, is that we have not presented sufficient evidence that the leaks came from UEFA. Indeed, we contradicted ourselves by saying that the leaks could influence the decision, yet the decision was already known and leaked.

So, what happens next?


UEFA claim they have not yet made a decision. In fact, they claim they have not refused to pause the investigation as city requested. So there could be a pause whilst the leaks are investigated.

City's claim for damages and a full investigation into UEFA and the leaks is inadmissible by CAS. But that is because CAS is the wrong forum in which to do this. City could go to an Ordinary Arbitration Proceeding to force this action.

UEFA could come to a decision and pass judgement, any ban or fine likely to be challenged by city, so again back to CAS. But this time CAS would have to rule one way or the other as the AC would have competed it's role.

UEFA could drop the investigation due to lack of evidence, or impose a suspended ban or fine. They could therefore claim any leak was therefore evidently false, and discourage an independent investigation or referral to the OAP. But they'd have egg on their face given that their own investigation found enough to ask the AC to sit and rule on a suitable punishment for City.

Edit.. oh, and one last option. City ask for a settlement and take a reduced punishment. Hardly worth mentioning.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Apart from CAS saying the leaks are "worrisome", what else is there in these latest reports to suggest it could go our way? I can't really see anything?

Nothing regarding the facts of the case, and any evidence - the CAS review wasn't anything to do with that aspect, and the basis for refusal was "not our job at this stage of proceedings".

As others have said, that they made the clear comments about the leaks and comments from LeTerme seems striking, and can certainly be read if it's a rebuke and may be held against them. It does however say that there is no evidence that the committees are not doing their job fairly - that seems reasonable on the facts available publically: as the leak source is unknown, no-one can be held responsible at the moment.