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

[Roachy]

Clever! Only, there was never any need for it to come from Mansour as ADEC were the ones propping Etihad up. If this is the crux of UEFA's main beef with us, are they really that thick - once it's been explained to them - to assume HH is still Sheikh Mansour? That's some serious fucking straw clutching from UEFA if it is indeed the case!

I mentioned this yesterday. Would they really be that ignorant? It would be astonishing really.

 

[willipp]

The M.E.N might but I doubt any of the others will.

I can understand why emails suggesting that ADUG maybe funding the Etihad sponsorship have become big news so by the same token evidence that it was covered by the Abu Dhabi Executive should be newsworthy too. Unless of course the objective is to smear.

Over to you David Conn. This is your territory. If you've got any integrity you will run this.

Is such evidence relevant to the CAS enquiry? I am confused as to the scope of their investigation.

I can hear the tapping of keyboards rushing to break this story. Oh wait, no sorry it was just the wind blowing.

 

[supercity88]

Clever! Only, there was never any need for it to come from Mansour as ADEC were the ones propping Etihad up. If this is the crux of UEFA's main beef with us, are they really that thick - once it's been explained to them - to assume HH is still Sheikh Mansour? That's some serious fucking straw clutching from UEFA if it is indeed the case!

No exactly. And as I have just posted, why wouldn't we get a larger injection to beat FFP. Yes FFP targets were altered last minute which gave us no chance anyway, but no business would get an injection from an owner and still miss targets and face punishment. It doesn't make sense. UEFA clearly felt they had to act on this because they have wider interests pushing them to punish City. PSG are safe because they have friends at the top table now. But our enemies still want to punish us anyway they can and regardless of facts

 

[Saddleworth2]

Makes me wonder what UEFA have actually got.

If it's just this then surely even they wouldn't go with this as justification added to the state of the 'investigation' process they'd be shooting themselves in both feet.

The actual evidence isn’t the main focus of CAS. It’s simply ‘did UEFA follow their own procedures and governance in conducting their investigation of us’. The only place the evidence would be tested with rigour is in court. I sincerely hope if CAS overturn the ban, we don’t stop at that, we make sure that the evidence is properly reviewed and we are found to have done nothing wrong. Win that case and then go after the media. I can dream....

 

[Gordyola]

Just a query (as an IT person from the days of punched cards and paper tape - for youngsters that is the 1960/70s) .........................
How do we know the 'leaked emails' haven't been 'doctored' to make us look guilty?
In the good old days I used to be able to change punch cards and paper tape by filling in the holes.
And I could change data in computer files - and I wasn't a hacker just someone knowing my way around computer systems and data storage.
Also it is so easy today to amend anything once it is on a computer.Photoshopping is a typical example.

Exactly, The club have always maintain silence on this so if City say that the emails were faked, or changed, then how could UEFA prove otherwise? After all all obtained illegally

 

[Saddleworth2]

The M.E.N might but I doubt any of the others will.

I can understand why emails suggesting that ADUG maybe funding the Etihad sponsorship have become big news so by the same token evidence that it was covered by the Abu Dhabi Executive should be newsworthy too. Unless of course the objective is to smear.

Over to you David Conn. This is your territory. If you've got any integrity you will run this.

Is such evidence relevant to the CAS enquiry? I am confused as to the scope of their investigation.

The main focus of Cas will be did Uefa follow their own processes and governance in investigating us. There is good evidence that they didn’t.

 

[Eds]

From Der-Spiegel leaked email analysis
"As we discussed, the annual direct obligation for Aabar is GBP 3 million," Pearce wrote. "The remaining 12 million GBP requirement will come from alternative sources provided by His Highness."

With just a single sentence, Pearce confirmed the accusations that his club had repeatedly, indignantly rejected: Namely, that His Highness, Sheikh Mansour, paid a portion of the sponsoring money himself!

Der-Spiegel have clearly assumed that His Highness is Sheikh Mansour

Pearce, highly experienced Abu Dhabi protocol, won's have made a simple mistake as BlueAnorak said above doing so leads to being bollocked

I am confused here. How should Sheikh Mansour be referred to in an email?

 

[Manchester1894]

Wonder if seasoncards might finally be reduced?

 

[give it to gordon]

I am confused here. How should Sheikh Mansour be referred to in an email?

HE = His Excellency

 

[Gordyola]

Clever! Only, there was never any need for it to come from Mansour as ADEC were the ones propping Etihad up. If this is the crux of UEFA's main beef with us, are they really that thick - once it's been explained to them - to assume HH is still Sheikh Mansour? That's some serious fucking straw clutching from UEFA if it is indeed the case!

Der Spiegel assumed that HH is Sheikh Mansour

From hacked email "The remaining 12 million GBP requirement will come from alternative sources provided by His Highness."

With just a single sentence, Pearce confirmed the accusations that his club had repeatedly, indignantly rejected: Namely, that His Highness, Sheikh Mansour, paid a portion of the sponsoring money himself!