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

[city saint]

city tearing UEFA apart again

 

[sir baconface]

Oh, do fuck off, povvo. ;-)

Moi?

 

[YaYa's Left Peg]

TBH this is becoming a very very big cam of worms that UEFA i feel would not want opening

webcam?

 

[domalino]

Sorry mate but I disagree in both points. If City are convinced in their irrefutable evidence of no wrong doing, they won’t only be attacking UEFA’s procedural violations.

Secondly, that document, though leaked, if true, wouldn’t be needed. Etihad will have their own versions of it. Anything that shows the funds didn’t come from Mansour is all they need.

City have been quite clear that they beleive they can win on the facts, not just procedure. "irrefutable evidence" etc.

If they can do that, they absolutely have to for the sake of the club's reputation. Winning on a procedural error or technicality will put us in Europe next year, but we'll still be the pariah club in the press and in the views of the ECA and that just leads to more pressure for these kind of investigations, so it does have a material impact.

 

[M18CTID]

We're fuckin huge !!!

If we get this overturned at CAS, and destroy UEFA and their shitty cartel in the process, it could gain us an army of new fans!

 

[Plays By Sense Of Smell]

If we win the CL this year with everything that is now happening, it would be the biggest achievement in this clubs history - without question.

Biggest achievement in football - topping even José’s second place!

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

If we get this overturned at CAS, and destroy UEFA and their shitty cartel in the process, it could gain us an army of new fans!

And if we lose we could be down to bedrock support (still big).

There's a huge amount at stake here.

 

[Blue Hefner]

@Prestwich_Blue I’ve just had a look at the initial Settlement Agreement(SA) and as I’m sure you know it covers the seasons from 2013/2014 up to and including 2015/2016

In UEFA’s statement on Friday they specify the penalty is for breaches from 2012-2016. Now given the Settlement Agreement and UEFA’s own 5 year limitation UEFA seem only able to investigate about 6 months worth of accounts(at best). Do I understand this correctly?

If so, how would UEFA go about reopening the 2014 SA? It would surely require a gross breach to even entertain the idea of reopening and overinflating sponsorship which allegedly happened during a period they already looked at seems pretty weak. But even if that is true, the punishment doesn’t really fit the ‘crime’. Unless they are accusing City of cooking the books for the best part of 5 years which, if true, then we would have bigger things to worry about than Sterling or Sane leaving - that would be an issue for the U.K. courts not UEFA’s imaginary one, surely?

Thanks in advance. But don’t be shy in calling me an idiot who’s got it all wrong....

 

[Thorin Oakenshield]

I think we're in danger of letting David Conn monopolise our thoughts and we're also running the risk of attacking FFP in its entirety. City may well be prepared to do that in the courts before this business is finished but at the moment the priority is winning the appeal and I'd like comments on whether I have a clear view of the situation as it is.
1. CAS is not the place to question the legality of FFP
2. CAS will concern itself with process almost exclusively and the only question to be dealt with is whether City received a fair hearing before IC and AC. CAS will also need to be convinced that City have been treated in a manner which is consistent with clubs in other comparable cases.
3. City will argue that UEFA are trying to reopen mattres dealt with already in 2014 and it is not admissible to punish the club twice for the same deeds (City did not accept they had done anything wrong in 2014).
4 There were irregularities in the way the club was dealt with in 2014, notably the changing of dates on which player wages were included in the calculation of allowable deductions after the submission of our accounts.
5. The accusations made are founded on documents stolen from the club and quoted out of context and thus should not be considered. The clubs accounts are an accurate statement and have been accepted by UEFA.
6 The severity of the punishment handed down was justified in part by the alleged refusal of the club to cooperate with the inquiry and yet the club initially welcomed it. In fact the club submitted 200 documents as evidence, but the court did not give the club an opportunity to present the evidence and did not even read it.
7 The IC systematically breached its obligations to confidentiality and to act in good faith which undermined the integrity of the adjudicatory process.
8 The case involving City has not been dealt with in a manner consistent with the treatment of other clubs in similar cases. The case of PSG in particular is entirely different and illustrates the whimsical nature of UEFA's processes.

If I am wrong in any of this or there are any grounds for our appeal please post in with them.

So do you think city will win the appeal?

 

[Roachy]

Sorry mate but I disagree in both points. If City are convinced in their irrefutable evidence of no wrong doing, they won’t only be attacking UEFA’s procedural violations.

Secondly, that document, though leaked, if true, wouldn’t be needed. Etihad will have their own versions of it. Anything that shows the funds didn’t come from Mansour is all they need.

Exactly. It will not be enough for City, and I would suggest more specifically Khaldoon, to have this quashed for procedural failings by UEFA. City will more importantly, and rightly so, want to exonerate themselves of any wrongdoing in relation to what UEFA are actually alleging. The secondary consequence of this would be the discredit that UEFA would hopefully suffer.