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

[HalfwayUpTheKippax]

Compared to HH he,s a Dell Boy

Are you UEFA or a Guardian “journalist? How many times do you need to be told, HH is NOT Sheikh Mansour!

 

[Grassland Blue]

Coupled with non-cooperation.
They will claim the leaked emails and even the US Open Skys leak show that we lied in our submission in 2013-14. It will lead to a discussion on the differences between the minutiae of differences between FFP and IAS 24 that will cause the eyes of most fans to glaze over. We will be guilty of being cash rich, which we are.

Should we hire Boris' bus?!

 

[Marvin]

I am a bit disappointed that CAS did not respond to City's appeal by suspending the ban.

 

[Keeper!]

I am a bit disappointed that CAS did not respond to City's appeal by suspending the ban.

Give them chance to read the submissions first.

 

[Gordyola]

I am a bit disappointed that CAS did not respond to City's appeal by suspending the ban.

Wasn't it determined that City had to request it and it looks like they haven't CAS being aware of the nature of the appeal would be more likely to expedite it if the suspension wasn't requested

 

[blueparrot]

I am a bit disappointed that CAS did not respond to City's appeal by suspending the ban.

Give them chance, doubt they've even picked the 3 judges yet, let alone have a look at the suspension of the ban.

 

[Kinkys Left Foot]

Here's how it works. Most journalists ideally require two sources to corroborate the story before they'll publish. As an example, a journalist gets a tip from a source that a player has done something that's very newsworthy. He then has to check it and goes to the player's club or agent.

I know of a real-life examples where the player's agent was approached about a potentially very damaging story for a well known player. The agent already knows of course because the player has told him. He persuades the journo either not to write the story or, if there's no possibility of keeping it out of the press, to tone it down significantly. To get that outcome they'll have to promise something. That could be something helpful, such as exclusive access to that agent's clients, another big story as an exclusive at a future date or some other inducement that's more useful to the journalist than publishing the story would be.

Or the reaction could be negative. The club/agent will firmly deny the story and may back that up with "print that and you'll be in court the next day". The journalist, his editor and the paper's legal team then have to make a decision and some are very risk averse. The phone hacking scandal possibly cost some papers nine-figure sums (£100m+) for example.

Or the club will refuse to comment and refer the journalist to their lawyers. One way or another, a few minutes later, the journalist is told or sent an email proving that there is an injunction or some other restriction in place against reporting x, y and z.

What will most likely have happened in the Liverpool hacking case is that the Times were briefed, probably by City in my view but could have been someone else with knowledge of the case, and were shown evidence to support the story. So they ran it. Every other paper sees that and contacts both City & Liverpool. We say "No comment" and Liverpool say "No comment and we'll sue if you publish". The editor of each paper will ask if the journalist has a direct source on this, to which the answer would be "No". So they can't run it as they couldn't defend it in court.

Just struck me that there's an interesting parallel to the UEFA FFP story, where UEFA may have little more than the Der Spiegel stories to go on. CAS isn't a court of course so they don't necessarily have the same burden of proof.

Obviously given Criminal courts require proof "beyond reasonable doubt" and civil courts "on the balance of probability" I was giving the requirement in arbitration cases some thought despite roadworks and crashes on the M66 preventing me from getting to my bed until 3am.

The link below gives some guidance and interesting outcomes in previous cases where "the balance of probability" is the burden. It will give you a general overview of some of the difficulties and guidance judges rely upon when reaching their decisions.

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreut...ansitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)

I also considered matters in relation to how Swiss arbitrary proceedings view the provision in evidence of what are referred to as "challenge documents"

https://www.gabriel-arbitration.ch/en/publications-and-speaking/dealing-with-challenged-documents

We obviously all wait now for these proceedings to commence and see how it all pans out.
It goes without saying nothing is certain in these matters.
I am however warmed by the words of our CEO and his statements give weight to the held consensus (although with reservation) that UEFA may indeed be using the DS emails as their primary evidence in the case.

Let's win everything we can in the meantime.

 

[BringBackSwales]

The words journalist and truth should never be stated in the same sentence.

Really? Even in the muen?

 

[blue oli]

The words journalist and truth should never be stated in the same sentence.

How about they truth is most journalists are only after clicks and attention’ ?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Wasn't it determined that City had to request it and it looks like they haven't CAS being aware of the nature of the appeal would be more likely to expedite it if the suspension wasn't requested

I thought CAS judged based on likely damage if overturned.
I'd expect City's submission to have raised the thought. It was only Monday that it arrived, and Wednesday that it was announced as having been received. Then they have to pick a panel, who have to review it. It's been barely any time at all for all that.