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

[blueinsa]

They won't be revealing their reasons to the press but of course they will have to in submissions to CAS both before and during any hearings. These will not be in the public domain before CAS's decision is reached.

You mean Gill wont be telling Stone?

 

[lancs blue]

Hopefully somebody can clear this up for me?

Uefa have since stated their findings and how they reached a punishment won't be released until after CAS have now ruled?

How do CAS rule unless they are made privy to those findings, in what is bound to be a very public TV case, regardless of reporting restrictions?

UEFA will have to release that evidence to CAS, I read their statement as meaning there will be no public disclosure until the CAS verdict is announced.

 

[dario2739]

I repeat how can you be sure we were offered a viable way out? The people who may be wrongly accused probably consider it a lot more important than been guilty of a technical breach.Also we can't easily quantify the damage in the medium to long term. If we get back into Europe I would suggest it would be limited. Most of those sneering bastards in the press running us down at present hate us anyway as do a lot of others in football nationally and internationally our brand has and will always suffer as a result.

I feel we may (and should) persue damages when the dust clears

 

[blue ranger]

Both City and UEFA get to pick one sitting judge each on a panel of three.

It will come down to who the 'independent' is.

Don’t think it works entirely like that, and I’m not an expert. I think we both get a chance to pick from a list.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

If / when City appeal, could take months for the hearing - if so I presume City cant be banned next season if the appeal hasnt started?

 

[BlueAnorak]

I fucking hate the guy but one paragraph stuck out to me which I never really thought about but would have to agree with

"There is no guarantee City will be granted a suspension of their ban when they apply for it in the coming days at the same time as any appeal. The decision - made by a Cas official - will be based on an assessment of the merits of City's appeal, so this initial decision will give a strong indication of their prospects."

Can UEFA afford to give us around £450m + legal fees if they play hardball and lose? (Loss of revenue + damages)

 

[badaz52]

Hacked emails can't be used as evidence so it is likely city will of provided evidence to counter it.

Don't forget the UEFA 'jury' isn't one of a criminal court, it's like asking a few blokes down the pub if someone is guilty.

CAS will be far more rigorous and critical of process rather than the result and it's the process that city will look to tear apart.

City can already demonstrate a poor process because UEFA 'judges' were leaking citys punishment before the court had started to sit......

In a regular court that case would be null and void.

Hacked emails can be used as evidence, even in a court they can if they are relevant to the investigation except UEFA isn't a court so that doesn't matter.

 

[mcs]

I have faith in the owners at our Club.

The accusations that we have acted like Cowboys dont cut it with me,it is simply an MSM smear campaign.

Our owners are Billionaire businessmen with interests all over the Globe.

They have the best lawyers, and accountants, money can buy.

Based on what i have read in the News and from informative posters on this forum.The whole UEFA case was based on stolen,extremely contentious emails.Said emails they are not even sure who the recipient was,seeing as "HH" could have been a whole number of people in the Country.

UEFA interpreted the emails as conclusive proof of an FFP violation.Even though UEFA were not 100% who the fuck "HH" really is.And they had no idea in what context said emails were sent,they could have been part of a much larger conversation.

To cover for the glaring discrepancies UEFA charges us with failing to assist their investigation.reason being Manchester City FC would only send UEFA proof of our innocence, rather than the smoking Gun they wanted.

The case will come down to what evidence UEFA has been able to compile to supplement the leaked emails. If its the leaked emails and tumbleweed (which is what City are hedging), then I reckon we will give 'em an absolute bath in CAS - after all we are in a position of power in all this, in terms of having access to 'context documents' that UEFA simply has no jurisdiction to get - even with whatever information gathering powers they have under FFP. If UEFA has done the hard yards, corroborated what is implied by the dirty emails through other evidence - then we are up a creek most likely, and deservedly so if other evidence can support their arguments to show we 'misled them' about the source of funding underlying sponsorship (not the very clearly chosen words in UEFAs statmeent - this is not about 'overvaluing' our sponsorships, but 'overstating' them - which to me suggests a focus on the source of the funds in the case of UEFA, not the absolute quantum (which was what got us the first time around)


But if UEFA has been bluffing, and the hacked emails are basically it, then if our lawyers are worth anything like what we will pay them, then we will have them over a barrel.

Its a fascinating example of John Nash 'game theory' at play. Lots of brikmanship, lots of gamesmanship, lots of strategy based on 'i think they know this, or think this, or have this'. It seems likely one party or the other will take a heavy beating if it is all played out either in CAS or later on in the courts. Hence my view is that the most likely outcome of CAS is a negotiated settlement with a much lower punishment.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Who was the worst? Bobby Charlton?

Our erstwhile club chairman perhaps...

 

[mcs]

Hopefully somebody can clear this up for me?

Uefa have since stated their findings and how they reached a punishment won't be released until after CAS have now ruled?

How do CAS rule unless they are made privy to those findings, in what is bound to be a very public TV case, regardless of reporting restrictions?

They mena it won't be released pubilcly. CAS will have access to the information.