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

[Centurions]

It is.

And you know this for a fact how exactly?

 

[domalino]

That's the email. Has Conn confirmed it as a fact it wasn't ADUG - I thought he just lifted Colin's find on the Open Skies investigation?

Well he's written the article using the Open Skies leak

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ip-covered-by-abu-dhabi-government-not-etihad

I suppose you could argue he's not presenting it as definite fact in the paper, only detailing the leaked email, but IIRC he was more certain in his language on twitter.

Either way both cannot be true, and I'd love to see someone nail him down to one or other.

 

[domalino]

And you know this for a fact how exactly?

Because as I posted above it's taken from a tweet by the der Spiegel writer.

City aren't contesting the emails being real, Soriano even referred to them as hacked and stolen, so he's confirmed they are real.

 

[blue oli]

The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact that ADUG didn't pay.

It would just be nice to see them explain the conflict. FairSkies proves Executive Committee paid, email says ADUG...the only conclusion is that the email is wrong and not a record of what happened.

But will they ever admit that?

And as this email is in ASCII text and NOT a facsimile copy this wouldn’t even be allowed in court as the chances of it being altered are extremely high.

Should not even be allowed as evidence and I suspect the club evidence that UEFA ignored included a copy of the original email which showed the correct funding sources.

 

[Fame Monster]

Why , you think Scotlands a far away place, think some fans based further into Scotland than me have season tickets. Is an opinion better if you go to 20 games or 7 ?

No just asking to see if you had a season ticket seen as though you seemed to be critical of me giving up my season ticket in your original post.

Also, I suppose it's relevant to your views on VAR because if you never go to a game, chances are that VAR's going to be much less of a problem for you than it would be for someone who goes week-in, week-out.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

And you know this for a fact how exactly?

City have confirmed they are real by claiming they are out of context. Never have they said “fabricated” or “fake”.

 

[Marvin]

It is.

Looks bad but if ultimately the Abu Dhabi Exec Committee underwrote the deal which is what is now believed even by our media detractors then how the funds are routed through from the UAE to the owner is really unimportant....unless someone has an argument about related parties.

Are UEFA expecting us to believe that City agreed a stadium and shirt sponsorship deal for £8m? That's clearly nonsense.

 

[kaz7]

No just asking to see if you had a season ticket seen as though you seemed to be critical of me giving up my season ticket in your original post.

Also, I suppose it's relevant to your views on VAR because if you never go to a game, chances are that VAR's going to be much less of a problem for you than it would be for someone who goes week-in, week-out.

I watch at home and i hate var,they hardly show the var check anymore,they used to show every check in detail but now they don't bother,one thing is clear though that sky and bt can see the var feed and tell us what the result is before the ref tells us,it's all wrong

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Well he's written the article using the Open Skies leak

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ip-covered-by-abu-dhabi-government-not-etihad

I suppose you could argue he's not presenting it as definite fact in the paper, only detailing the leaked email, but IIRC he was more certain in his language on twitter.

Either way both cannot be true, and I'd love to see someone nail him down to one or other.

I don't think Conn has done anything more than lift Colin's find and then present it as his own work, with zero commitment to acting upon the discrepancies of the Open Skies document and this hacked email.

We have never denied the emails, only that they were taken out of context.

I think what is more worrying is that ADUG are mentioned by name, no ambiguity, unless it has been doctored.

Which email concerns HH?

Which still leaves us posing the question what City have or have not yet presented which is irrefutable?

It can only be the paper trail showing the money going from ADEC to Etihad?

Can ADEC give it to ADUG directly?

 

[Fame Monster]

The der Spiegel stories did have images attatched of the emails.




If I had the energy, I would ask Christoph Winterbach or David Conn what they thought about how the email explicitly says ADUG, but David Conn has confirmed for a fact that ADUG didn't pay.

It would just be nice to see them explain the conflict. FairSkies proves Executive Committee paid, email says ADUG...the only conclusion is that the email is wrong and not a record of what happened.

But will they ever admit that?

If that email is true and obviously City will be aware of that, apart from the very strong procedural arguments we'll be making, I'm guessing the main substantive argument will be that it doesn't matter where Etihad gets its money from (question for the accountants)?