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

[KS55]

Could he end with "now fuck off" or in arabic - تبا

Wonderful dreamer

 

[city saint]

The story of us being stripped of our titles concerns me more. Not arsed about champions league but losing the titles we won would be a hard pill to swallow... and one the rags and scousers would never fail to remind us about

wont happen but I couldn't give a fuck what armchair rags and dippers say about us

 

[lancs blue]

No, I don't expect it to happen, I am just saying it should (in the post-Brexit landscape). I just hope City don't try to take it to the European Court of Justice - we can't on the one hand remove ourselves from Europe (via the 2016 referendum and the 2019 General Election) but then go crawling back to their legal system when our footy team needs it.

You do understand that as the FAs in all EU countries are members of UEFA, that UEFA's rules and regulations have to be compliant with EU law in many areas. Why on earth you're bringing Brexit into this I have no idea.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

The story of us being stripped of our titles concerns me more. Not arsed about champions league but losing the titles we won would be a hard pill to swallow... and one the rags and scousers would never fail to remind us about

It's all nonsense, hacks getting carried away if you ask me. It would be the biggest farce in sport if it happened.

 

[dario2739]

I think the starting point is to examine the settlement agreement with UEFA from 16 May 2014. The timeline is interesting and I will comment upon that later.

I looked at that agreement, which covers 13/14, 14/15 and 15/16. These are the years, as well as 12/13, that the Adjudicatory Chamber (AC) are now alleging we ‘committed serious breaches of FFP by overstating it’s sponsorship revenue and the break-even information submitted to UEFA between 2012 and 2016’.

UEFA’s rules in effect place a 5 year time limit on investigations. This is relevant because they made the referral to the Investigatory Chamber ONE DAY before 5 years had elapsed from the 2014 settlement agreement (15 May 2019). In other words they are relying upon the date of the settlement agreement to then trigger the investigation going back MORE than 5 years. It’s honestly hard to understand how the judges on the AC accepted that the investigation could look into the period that had already been covered by the settlement agreement. This has to be one of City’s key arguments before CAS.

I think the other key point for City is that our accounts were duly monitored by both UEFA and our external auditors to ensure FFP compliance in the periods covered by the 2014 settlement agreement.

Having said all that, the AC was chaired by a senior European judge, and they found against us.

I can’t see how City can be so certain that we will win at CAS. If (I repeat if) we were offered a settlement by Ceferin that acknowledged some admission of wrongdoing, and a fine without a ban, in my opinion we should have grabbed it. This is simply because legal decisions can be very unpredictable, and they often take a long time to deliver. CAS may toss out the AC decision, they may partially overturn it, or they might simply agree with the AC, and it may not happen before the Chumps League starts. And that raises a whole new bunch of questions about whether they will let us play in the Chumps League next season pending the CAS decision.

I think one point we should bring up is how PSG were allowed to get away with over-valued sponsorship (over double ours), even though UEFA's own audit said it was 95% over-valued!
Also think we should be investigating why the email hacker targetted us... and who was behind that!
We all want justice, but I want revenge... I hope City bring the whole house of cards down... UEFA, G14 clubs... the lot - and when the dust settles, I hope they set our lawyers on certain cnuts within the press.

 

[dario2739]

It's all nonsense, hacks getting carried away if you ask me. It would be the biggest farce in sport if it happened.

We bought the best players to fit a system, brought in the best manager - and won the league... no different to how they won theirs, apart from the illegal restriction of trade imposed by UEFA to protect an established elite... our only crime is owner investment!

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Excellent post. I think we will be bringing up the issue of UEFA's haste to pass this case to the AC one day in advance of the deadline and the impact that had on our ability to mount an effective defence. If the stories about Ceferin offering a deal are also true (and my sources are good on that) it also brings the the AC's supposed independence into question.

PB...the other week in a post you mentioned possible lawsuits, could this be related to what has happened this week or is it another matter ?

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Before a case goes to court, both sides can get disclosure of the points the other side will use.
I have no doubt that our legal team will have reams of information about key players in both UEFA and the G14 Clubs that are driving this self preservation policy.
When UEFA get this disclosure, and key figures realise that not only will their financial transactions be under scrutiny, but they will also be looking at jail time, UEFA will withdraw the case, all charges withdrawn and FFP will be dead in the water.

I don't think withdraw us the word that will be used, maybe a deliberate poor defense at CAS is the way they'll want to go but that would get the G14 on their case.... assuming we're legal as per our club statements we can sit back and watch the establishment clubs & UEFA destroy each other.



Is that my alarm clock going off? ;)

 

[Rochdale Blue]

It’s in the mail and it’s all hypothetical but it will attract clicks, which in turn attracts advertisers which attracts revenue.

It's certainly attracted an infestation of mouth foaming dippers in the comments.

 

[mcs]

I think the starting point is to examine the settlement agreement with UEFA from 16 May 2014. The timeline is interesting and I will comment upon that later.

I looked at that agreement, which covers 13/14, 14/15 and 15/16. These are the years, as well as 12/13, that the Adjudicatory Chamber (AC) are now alleging we ‘committed serious breaches of FFP by overstating it’s sponsorship revenue and the break-even information submitted to UEFA between 2012 and 2016’.

UEFA’s rules in effect place a 5 year time limit on investigations. This is relevant because they made the referral to the Investigatory Chamber ONE DAY before 5 years had elapsed from the 2014 settlement agreement (15 May 2019). In other words they are relying upon the date of the settlement agreement to then trigger the investigation going back MORE than 5 years. It’s honestly hard to understand how the judges on the AC accepted that the investigation could look into the period that had already been covered by the settlement agreement. This has to be one of City’s key arguments before CAS.

I think the other key point for City is that our accounts were duly monitored by both UEFA and our external auditors to ensure FFP compliance in the periods covered by the 2014 settlement agreement.

Having said all that, the AC was chaired by a senior European judge, and they found against us.

I can’t see how City can be so certain that we will win at CAS. If (I repeat if) we were offered a settlement by Ceferin that acknowledged some admission of wrongdoing, and a fine without a ban, in my opinion we should have grabbed it. This is simply because legal decisions can be very unpredictable, and they often take a long time to deliver. CAS may toss out the AC decision, they may partially overturn it, or they might simply agree with the AC, and it may not happen before the Chumps League starts. And that raises a whole new bunch of questions about whether they will let us play in the Chumps League next season pending the CAS decision.

The question of the settlement on the original deal is interesting. Surely the 'agreement' would have been watertight in terms of that being that for those offences - as most out of court settlements are. There has to be a fair amount of greyness in regards to what will constitute 'new offences' to 'already punished for offences'.

I feel that is why the focus is all on 'misleading UEFA', but there hasn't even been a scerrick of information leaked about the magnitude of the offences (noting of course the broader comment about keeping the details until CAS has been heard - but we know UEFA love a good leak). I suspect there isn't much on a $$$ basis that isn't already covered by the first settlement, hence the alternate focus of UEFA.