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

[mrtwiceaseason]

I sent my wife a text yesterday saying: Going to the Cinema with Charlie.
Actually, I went to the pub with Christine.
The text is not evidence of what I actually did.

Pretty stupid thing to do admit to your wife you have drug problem if you ask me :+)

 

[George Hannah]

The charge always levelled against Montgomery was that he was too cautious, only fighting battles when he knew the odds were heavily in his favour and incapable of exploiting opportunities on the battlefield itself. At El Alamein the Axis forces had over-extended themselves whereas we had short supply lines and time to build up our forces. Even then he struggled and it took two attempts to achieve the crucial breakthrough.

I'd say it was more like our Stalingrad, where the Russians really had their backs to the wall and were forced back to the banks of the Volga. They were just about hanging on but were saved by a major operation that hit the weak flanks of the German armies, far behind the front and cut off the 6th Army from the rest of the Germans to the south and west of Stalingrad. Then they turned inwards and destroyed the pocket of German forces that were left. I'd say this was more our Stalingrad than El Alamein.

Baron Pannick is our Georgy Zhukov and you our Aleksandr Vasilevsky

 

[Groke]

That was Rommel's mistake too.

Hopefully, our Rommel is forced to shoot himself too!

 

[ganganvince]

Baron Pannick is our Georgy Zhukov and you our Aleksandr Vasilevsky

Are they the Meercats?

 

[KS55]

The main thing is that we do not agree to a gagging order as part of any settlement. We need to hold a major press conference after the case and systematically go through every spit and cough of our evidence. If further legal action is possible we should pursue UEFA for damages. We should also take action against those media outlets which have published false and defamatory information abut us. They haven't got a leg to stand on because, as in all civil cases, they would have to prove what they have published is true.
If possible we should also publish any evidence we have about who has been leaking to our commercial rivals. This needs to be a moment when we re-set our relationship with the media and make sure that the reputation of the club, and all its fans and staff, is protected moving forward. A gagging order would be almost as bad as a legal defeat in my view. The truth needs to come out.

The press would respond that their articles were fair comment on a matter of public interest. We would be unlikely to defeat that defence.
You are right that we need to get as much as possible into the public domain.

 

[willipp]

That should be the way it works. UEFA brought the charge and sanctioned us on the basis of evidence they claim proved it.

It almost feels like uefa have brought the charges, investigated us, then asked us to help them prove it and finally banned us for not helping them.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Some statement PB, hope you’re correct mate.

I'd also make the point that losing at Stalingrad wouldn't have been a strategic disaster for Russia, although it would have been bad. It was largely a dick-waving contest between Stalin and Hitler. Germany's strategic interests would have been better served by striking south, for the Caspian and the oil fields there. Even if they'd won at Stalingrad, they'd have still had to cross the Volga in strength, which they had no need to do. If we'd lost at El Alamein, that really would have been a strategic disaster.

 

[slbsn]

He's just a troll, probably banned previously so don't give him the oxygen he craves.

Read this story from yesterday. UEFA haven't spoken to Pinto, which I think backs up my story.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-prison-with-hard-drive-passwords-in-his-head

UEFA wouldn't speak to Pinto (who is in prison) - he is not a witness and you couldn't give his evidence any weight so it is neither here nor there.

Nevertheless, Article 13 of the Procedural Rules (https://it.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Clublicensing/02/60/83/59/2608359_DOWNLOAD.pdf) give theoretical scope to the IC to consider anything as evidence: "All means of evidence may be considered by the CFCB chief investigator. This includes, but is not limited to, the defendant’s testimony, witness testimonies, documents and records, recordings (audio or video), on-site inspections and expert reports."

Article 23 allows the AC scope for further evidence: "The adjudicatory chamber may request either the reporting investigator or the defendant to produce such evidence as the adjudicatory chamber may consider appropriate for the determination of the case." Importantly, "The adjudicatory chamber determines the admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of the evidence offered."

This, again in theory, means that the IC and the AC could take screen grabs of an unverified magazine article as its "evidence" and unilaterally declare them to be admissible, relevant, material and with good evidential "weight."

However, in my opinion (including having now read numerous AC decisions and CAS judgments), it is extremely unlikely that UEFA's evidence amounts to screen grabs of an unverified magazine article - I don't believe that could reach the evidential hurdle especially in circumstances where the audited accounts (and no doubt the actual sponsorship contract between City and Ethiad) conflict with the few emails pictured in the article.

Constructing a narrative that its all a conspiratorial, flimsy fix that will definitely be dismissed by CAS is going to end in disappointment. City have a fight on their hands - but that is not to say they will not have many good arguments.

I do agree that the flimsy "non cooperation" charge will probably be City's failure to provide certain documents requested by UEFA with City probably arguing them to be third party documents or irrelevant. The idea the emails in the article are doctored seems like wishful thinking as well.

Read my 2 part semi-long reads here if you are interested: https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-manchester-city-uefa-go-to-war/

 

[KS55]

The charge always levelled against Montgomery was that he was too cautious, only fighting battles when he knew the odds were heavily in his favour and incapable of exploiting opportunities on the battlefield itself. At El Alamein the Axis forces had over-extended themselves whereas we had short supply lines and time to build up our forces. Even then he struggled and it took two attempts to achieve the crucial breakthrough.

I'd say it was more like our Stalingrad, where the Russians really had their backs to the wall and were forced back to the banks of the Volga. They were just about hanging on but were saved by a major operation that hit the weak flanks of the German armies, far behind the front and cut off the 6th Army from the rest of the Germans to the south and west of Stalingrad. Then they turned inwards and destroyed the pocket of German forces that were left. I'd say this was more our Stalingrad than El Alamein.

Or it could be our Hastings. Oh......

 

[mexico1970]

Or it could be our Hastings. Oh......

Or it can be re-run and it'll be a Good-Win-Son.