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

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%

  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%

  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%

  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%
  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a club not 40miles from Manchester,A club liked a near by park,it had trees and grass,Mr H & Mr G conned EUFA that £50’000’O00 was spent on this park,it’s still has trees & grass.Its all OK if you are ?”royalty”.
 
All prem clubs should be worried by this. Just as they don’t want us winning everything, they won’t want the scouse or Chelsea.
UEFA have the prem in their sights, were just first
 
DAV771 said:
I'd like to, there's not many places to get an articulate discussion these days and the Newport County forums are terrible. The abuse that's already been thrown at me for coming in with a genuine question after admitting I don't have a thorough knowledge of the issue is a bit OTT though.

Perhaps I'd be better suited to sticking to threads that aren't about City and just football in general.
Click to expand...
Oh behave nobody has abused you. I thought people from Newport were descendants of tough dock workers?
Stop playing the victim.
 
City Raider said:
@DAV771 seems genuine enough. It’s not his fault, he is the perfect example of what the average fan out there is thinking because of the diet of bullshit they’ve been force fed in the press for years. At least he’s come on here to find out more for himself. Isn’t that what we want?
Click to expand...
Yes I’m sure Newport fans are losing sleep over City!
If he has swallowed the media bollocks then he’s already a lost cause.
 
Henkeman said:
Quite right - but I suspect it's the first time someone has by implication threatened to use those leaks in order to crash the whole disciplinary system. Others could have in that past, including PSG. That it's City who are doing so indicates just how far gone this relationship is.
Click to expand...
Yeah. And this is exactly what i like about City owners.

PSG line is always : "we don't want enemies". They toe to the line and seem to always be cooperating in their statement. The only time they seemed to be threatening was when JC Blanc in an interview said PSG has been a model follower of all UEFA recommendations and still, we are being accused. And that he sees that as being an agenda driven by a cartel.

Can be read here : http://www.culturepsg.com/news/club...s-regles-du-fpf-ont-petit-a-petit-bouge/23886

I translated the the relevant part regarding leaks to the press and his views on FFP agenda :
Asked on the way the documents arrived in the press, he attacks again: "I do not know, you have to ask them. PSG has nothing to hide and works seamlessly with the institutions, UEFA, its administration and all contracts we sign are unveiled and explained to UEFA for seven years. What we have seen, however, is that the rules of the FPF have gradually shifted. Certainly to defend a cartel of some great clubs. But we remain determined, we remain respectful of the institution even if it would be nice if the freedom to invest that exists everywhere in Europe exists also in football.

There are the other parts of the interview :
Step by step and especially after having transferred two very great players in Paris 14 months ago, we realized that this process of UEFA restarted immediately after, because we went to take great players and put them in a big championship, which becomes even bigger thanks to these players, thanks to the investments made by the PSG which benefits the L1 and all the French clubs. We are delighted with this but the idea that French clubs come to play regularly in the last four of the Champions League does not please everyone. There are major leagues settled and the L1 deserves to make its place, to have more space and that's what PSG tries to do with ambitious investments that it has been carrying for 7 years.

The Financial Fair Play (FPF) file has been running for almost seven years with UEFA. Since the PSG has a big momentum and is trying to build a big club in record time, the rules of the FPF have been gradually moved to finally prevent investment and prevent a club that has significant resources and wants to race with the greatest to finally compete with the historic clubs.
 
The club statement makes it clear that City intend this matter to be resolved by "an independent judicial body" and the assumption, held almost universally, is that this is CAS. I cannot agree. The only cases CAS has dealt with concerning FFP were those of PSG, in which they overturned the verdict because CFCB had not followed its correct procedure, and AC Milan, where exclusion from European competition was not deemed a suitable punishment. City's difference with UEFA seems far wider. There is certainly fury at UEFA's failure to follow correct procedure, hence its reference to the leaks and its naming of Yves Leterme. But our complaint is not simply about "due process" but apparently concerns the entire competence of UEFA to deal with such matters. City have no intention of pleading fair cop gov but let us off because.... (as Milan and PSG appear to have done). City are going to argue that the whole matter of leaving this to UEFA is unacceptable. It appears we are not necessarily accused of breaching FFP rules but of "financial irregularities. This phraseology may be important because if it involves the integrity of City's accounts it may well bring into question certain very big players indeed as well and the commercial courts will be very interested to know UEFA's qualifications for pronouncing on such questions. CAS may deal with the question of the "hostile process" involved but a chamber which "ignores a body of irrefutable evidence provided by Manchester City FC to the chamber" on a matter of major financial/commercial interest? One of the issues certainly appears to be emerging as the right of UEFA to poke it nose into such matters at all - not just because it makes such a mess of it. And we are only the smallest of steps to the whole question of whether UEFA has any right to limit investment in any form by a club owner in his club. I think the endgame is coming and City seem ominously confident
 
DAV771 said:
Hi,

Please don't ban me as this is my first post and I'm just interested to get some answers. I came on here this morning as obviously we've all seen the news and I wanted to gauge what the average City fans reaction is.

Now (here comes the part where I fear I'll be banned) it seems that looking at the club from the outside there's obvious "financial doping" going on. I can't see how City could have achieved this much success in such a short space of time without it.

So, I am just wondering where the thoughts that UEFA have an agenda against City are coming from? I understand the opinion that FFP caters to the established big teams and ensures that they remain that way, but aside from that, I can't see what other reason there is to be angry? Surely UEFA are investigating/bringing charges for a reason other than they just don't like City.

They wouldn't just be looking into the club for no reason either, right? There's no smoke without fire & all that?

Apologies for signing up just to ask a simple questions but I know no City fans personally and there's no chance of getting sense out of anyone on Twitter etc

Even breaking it down to the most simple terms, as I (the average, not massively invested football fan) see it, City agreed to play by certain rules and have essentially broken or attempted to break those rules. Is this correct?

Again, please don't ban me for this. I'm just a confused neutral with no idea what's going on!

Thanks
Click to expand...

It's important to recognise that an owner putting money into a football club is not against the rules. People use the term financial doping and think that it is dodgy (some people in football have been quite disingenuous convincing people of that) but it's not necessarily so.

So yes, we have grown at a huge rate, and yes our owner has invested in the club but it's not necessarily against any rules.

Personally I think many people in football don't like the way we have grown, and think it's bad for football. I think they'll do what they can to stop it. We saw that early in the piece when UEFA changed their own guidelines on FFP after we had released our financial statements and it was too late for us to do anything about meeting the new guidelines.

There's also some whose motives aren't so fair. The G14 clubs see us as a threat and have tried everything they could to nullify that threat including developing and adapting FFP rules to suit their purposes.

Finally, we have been fairly clear that we haven't broken the rules. So unless/until that's proven otherwise I don't think your second to last paragraph applies.

I welcome the referral today, and I'll welcome a ban when it comes. Because until we take this to court we'll continually be subject to innuendo, and mistruths. Let's face it though, even if we do go to court and win it probably won't count for much in the court of public opinion.
 
Last edited:
City Raider said:
@DAV771 seems genuine enough. It’s not his fault, he is the perfect example of what the average fan out there is thinking because of the diet of bullshit they’ve been force fed in the press for years. At least he’s come on here to find out more for himself. Isn’t that what we want?
Click to expand...


An excellent summary, and indeed the guy is almost a bench mark of a passive non supporter digesting years of bullshit through the like of the press\bbc sky etc. It would be wrong of city fans to expect someone without a vested interest in City or an inquisitive nature to deviate from the bollocks pedalled by the BBC as an example. They are a publicly funded body with a charter indicating impartially, so why wouldn't most of the population take their headlines as gospel?
 
DAV771 said:
I am genuine but I won't be sticking around (not that any of you will care). This doesn't seem the place for me as a non City fan. Far too much hostility.
Click to expand...

Mate imagine you'd just won the league and were about to possibly write history at the weekend with a domestic treble. Despite this the only stories about your club in the media revolve around nonsense FFP breaches and your players singing a song about a team that's the scum of the earth whilst travelling back to Manchester. I think you'd be pretty annoyed and a wee bit suspicious of questions from fans of other clubs regarding said bullshit. If you're a Newport Fan you'd be quite at home on this forum as like city fans you'll have had your fair share of misery and like city fans embraced it wholeheartedly.
 
qatar blue said:
All prem clubs should be worried by this. Just as they don’t want us winning everything, they won’t want the scouse or Chelsea.
UEFA have the prem in their sights, were just first
Click to expand...
Chelsea had won only one title 1955 before Roman invested.......I don't remember all this hostility.

The little guys just loved getting one over on the rich new guy. Nothing wrong with that.

FFP is making investment " dirty" .
I am old enough to remember little forest spending 1,000,000 on Trevor Francis........how would that be viewed today. AND buying the worlds best keeper Peter Shilton.
There was nothing wrong with it .it helped their club write their history...unhindered by this bull shit.
I have no issue with anyone buying Newcastle and investing to win league.....that is what Rafa benetiz meeting probably hinged on today.....investment in players!
 
hello said:
An excellent summary, and indeed the guy is almost a bench mark of a passive non supporter digesting years of bullshit through the like of the press\bbc sky etc. It would be wrong of city fans to expect someone without a vested interest in City or an inquisitive nature to deviate from the bollocks pedalled by the BBC as an example. They are a publicly funded body with a charter indicating impartially, so why wouldn't most of the population take their headlines as gospel?
Click to expand...

This is it, I'm just trying to find out the other side of the argument but the likes of @Proy seem to prefer to attack anyone who doesn't already have an in depth knowledge of all of this. If attacking random people online is what he gets off on, who am I to judge?

Again, thanks to those who have taken time to try to educate me.
 
City Raider said:
@DAV771 seems genuine enough. It’s not his fault, he is the perfect example of what the average fan out there is thinking because of the diet of bullshit they’ve been force fed in the press for years. At least he’s come on here to find out more for himself. Isn’t that what we want?
Click to expand...

Excellent. Couldn’t put it better myself. He is, if you like, what the ‘average’ non City fan thinks. It is the media that has fed them this scenario.
 
DAV771 said:
Hi,

Please don't ban me as this is my first post and I'm just interested to get some answers. I came on here this morning as obviously we've all seen the news and I wanted to gauge what the average City fans reaction is.

Now (here comes the part where I fear I'll be banned) it seems that looking at the club from the outside there's obvious "financial doping" going on. I can't see how City could have achieved this much success in such a short space of time without it.

So, I am just wondering where the thoughts that UEFA have an agenda against City are coming from? I understand the opinion that FFP caters to the established big teams and ensures that they remain that way, but aside from that, I can't see what other reason there is to be angry? Surely UEFA are investigating/bringing charges for a reason other than they just don't like City.

They wouldn't just be looking into the club for no reason either, right? There's no smoke without fire & all that?

Apologies for signing up just to ask a simple questions but I know no City fans personally and there's no chance of getting sense out of anyone on Twitter etc

Even breaking it down to the most simple terms, as I (the average, not massively invested football fan) see it, City agreed to play by certain rules and have essentially broken or attempted to break those rules. Is this correct?

Again, please don't ban me for this. I'm just a confused neutral with no idea what's going on!

Thanks
Click to expand...

This may be a whoosh moment for me however i'll treat your Question as genuine (for now)

You have to go back to the very beginning and look at the very instigation of FFP
City did indeed sign up to abide by the rules put in place and set about putting in place various schemes to increase incomings and reduce outgoings (all of which are within the rules) we even employed the same people Uefa employed to draw up those rules to find ways around them. Essentially we believed those rules were put in place to stop us investing in our own business at a time when we were committed to do so to within the 10 year business plan that had been drawn up where escalated investment was critical to making that plan a success.
At the end of the 1st accountability period 2013 - 14 we had indeed spent a lot of money in fees and wages for players. Based on the rules that were in place we were able to discount a substantial amount of the excess monies as pre arranged wage commitments before FFP was thought of. We were however still struggling to meet the 3 year loss amount for the period that was allowed 34 Million. So we submitted our accounts as verified by our accountants and City do this publicly - not in the Cayman Islands where nobody gets to see it. We felt we had nothing to hide. However no sooner than the audited accounts were submitted Uefa changed the rules to ensure we couldn't claim the pre 2010 wages. It meant we would fail the test by a lot rather than by a little. We were clearly mislead and City were angry that their good faith had been abused.
The failure ensured Uefa carried out an investigation of our accounts and disagreements regarding sponsorship amounts and as to what is and isn't allowed. Suffice it to say agreements were reached on all those sponsorships and schemes whereby some were allowed to stand as they were whilst City agreed to curtail others and not continue with other schemes. NONE of the sponsorships was deemed to be overvalued but we agreed to be punished for failing the overall break even requirement. Such agreements are part of the process of FFP and are in fact integral to its operation. We suffered a huge fine, a restriction on squad size for the CL and agreement to abide by the break even amounts going forward under close scrutiny by Uefa.
We stuck to the rules, increased our sponsorships across the board (middle Eastern sponsorship now roughly accounts up to only 20% of our income only). We currently sit 5th in DeLoittes money list and expect to exceed income of £600 Million turnover this reporting year with no debt ensuring we have no fear of breaching the break even amount and will make a healthy profit (without our owner putting a penny in) for the last 3 years. This amounts to the completion of the first 10 year phase of City business plan and its utter success (despite the initial couple of years requiring the expenditure)
Last year following a hacker stealing lots of private information from servers all over the world (mainly Portugal) trying to blackmail banks without success certain emails were ahem given to a German newspaper (der Spiegel) who act as a whistleblower for alleged corrupt practices particularly within football.
They produced a series of articles quoting elements of emails they allege showed that Citys owner had in fact paid monies to some of Citys sponsors to pay the sponsorship fees. I should point out this doesn't artificially inflate these sponsorships as they are currently at values commensurate with our position in football and it was agreed by Uefa at the time we were investigated. What is surprising and what most journalists and twitter gobshites don't understand is that this process (if proven and City say it isn't) is not either illegal or against FFP rules. I accept it wouldn't be in the spirit of the Regulations but that is another argument. Most would argue that depriving an owner of investing money in his own business is not in the spirit of competition law in Europe as well.
So now Uefa have again investigated City on the back of those alleged emails and despite agreeing to keep stum and carry out a thorough process have done neither. They or as the press like to say "sources close to the investigation" have obviously blabbed to the press regarding findings and punishments to be administered before due process has been completed. So City declared guilty before the case is heard then!
So City have been referred to the Uefa FFP Adjunctory Chamber of the process for consideration of sentence and today we also find out that this investigation has been rushed is indeed incomplete because the matter had to be concluded within a 5 year period of the initial findings, ending today as they are FFP rules for the limitation of alleged offences.
It is still unclear what they are actually charging City with breaching but City have issued some extremely strong legal statements indicating we have given irrefutable evidence to the investigation that proves we are innocent of the charges of financial irregularity. Also indicated as any innocent party should faced with a guilty verdict that they will appeal any findings to an appropriate judicial review, likely in this case to be the Court for Arbitration in Sport (CAS)
That covers 5 years of bullshit and farce and there are other trivialities like members of both investigatory boards having "conflicts of interest" i.e Rick Parry ex of Liverpool Board being on the AC board deciding any punishment.

You can find all the Der Spiegel reports on line and reading through this thread in its entirety will greatly inform you of the intricacies of the whole sham that is FFP if you care to look. I for one am now reasonably well versed in the actions of Uefa in response to these investigations and their documented process. Most of the things about FFP that will surprise anybody are what is allowed as opposed to what isn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top