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

[Fred_Quimby]

There used to be many good investigative journalists on the national press but, since online reporting became the major outlet, clickbait has sadly become the norm.

Sad but true. It is not just the sports pages either.

 

[cheekybids]

Sam Lee's credibility was dented by the story he ran a few months back suggesting that UEFA were backing off taking tough action against City. He was ridiculed when they subsequently announced tough sanctions. I don't believe he would have been stupid enough to have written that without info from a good source.
It has been reported that there is an internal feud within EUFA between the pro Qatar camp and those who want to try and re-build the reputation of the organisation. I have wondered since if he was briefed by someone in UEFA from the faction which is more positive towards City.
If this is the case then we should be encouraged by more recent events namely the public criticism of Yves Leterme (including a subtle dig from CAS) and criminal charges being brought against Al Khelaifi. These two are cleary in the "anti-City" camp while Ceferin may be more neutral. This would also explain the more placatory tone from Soriano to the "wider UEFA organisation."

I just think he’s snide & I've given my reasons, he won’t be the first to get something wrong. He writes click bait & never from the City POV.

 

[Coatigan]

There are two questions for CAS to address at the hearing the first being - are we guilty of breaching FFP rules - where we are accused of “inflating” sponsorship deals. This will be a straight forward - yes you did and their is sufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support that claim Or no you didn’t and their is insufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support such a claim. Here we either get off Scott free or we get a punishment - there is no splitting the difference. This point may be complicated by City’s claim that the process used was unfair - But I won’t address that here safe to say that CAS have already indicated that the process used may have flaws.

The second question for CAS - which only arises if question 1 finds us guilty - is does the punishment fit the crime based upon comparison with similar cases - on that point the punishment does look disproportionate so thoughts about a 1 year ban probably do come into play BUT only at this point.

Agree with all that, other than, 2 years is the standard.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Excellent post again. There really is some great stuff on here, better than the media give us.

I'd say it's quite possibly not fantasy. The G-14 must be a thorn in his side, with their constant whingeing and breakaway threats. I'm sure he'd like to see them cowed, and if that involves breaking the back of the likes of Liverpool, the rags, Bayern, PSG then so be it.

I do now wonder whether we've had a quiet word with him to say a shit storm is coming and he can either be on the receiving end and get caught in the crossfire or stand apart from it and still be in charge of UEFA when we've finished with our targets. And, having seen what we've got, he decided discretion was definitely the better part of valour.

It seems to me that a City victory in CAS would end the existential threat to City and allow us to take matters as far as we wished. Ceferin would be faced with a devastatingly simple choice - kill or be killed! Does he lie down and allow defections right left and centre to some break away or does he do what leaders throughout history have done - change their spots and destroy their erstwhile allies who are now their enemies. He could claim that he had gradually, slowly but surely become aware that it was City which had the best interests of European football and fans at heart and that the G 14 were perverting them for their own corrupt purposes. I'm sure Ceferin has enough on the G***s, H****s and others of this world to make sure their plans for the future would be in tatters. If he's ruthless enough any family connection with Agnelli wouldn't cause him to lose sleep and he wouldn't face any serious, rival power base in UEFA for years to come after such sterling work.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I think this is an interesting point. Sometimes you need to see decisions in the right context and culture and that can be hard to understand and appreciate on the outside. Inside UEFA there are a lot of figures with a deep and well publicised level of hatred for City that distorts their sense of reality and gives way to a bizarre set of opinions - just look at the contradictory and hypocritical nonsense that comes out of Tabas’s mouth - for a senior official of a major football federation - would anyone consider his racist, xenophobic and slanderous accusations “fair, balanced and reasonable” ? Gill, Parry, Agnelli and Rummenigge may not make the same public outbursts but their hatred of City is no less than Tabas’s. In this context, there is a significant group of senior G14 officials within UEFA who want City gone, put in their place and cast out - how else do you explain the fact that they jumped on the Der Spiegel articles with such enthusiasm? Contrast that with the silence that met the news that Juventus were doubling its sponsorship received from Jeep? Maybe some of the G14 played a role in the Der Spiegel exclusive being published - I’ve said this before but I think Bayern’s dirty mitts are involved somewhere.

In this cauldron of hate, a rushed investigation is concluded with little or no input from the accused party and a severe punishment is prepared that wholly aligns with and gives the G14 and other UEFA senior officials what they want. How often do senior officials or senior politicians get smart, intelligent people to do crazy irrational things - just to please them? Was everyone at Enron stupid? I think not. Just watch the plethora of up-standing scientific and medical experts lining up each day to destroy their well earned professional reputations next to a lunatic President. What did Dr Birx say when her boss told his nation to ingest disinfectants? Answer nothing she just looked embarrassed.

It is clear that Ceferin despite his claims to have no knowledge of the case is at the very least uncomfortable with either the process or the punishment - and perhaps both. He went to extraordinary lengths (in public) to broker a settlement and as Head of UEFA he couldn’t have done more to distance himself from the process, the findings or the verdict. Ultimately we will find out at CAS, but I honestly think that the AC may have got itself worked up into a frenzy; in a culture of racially driven hatred against our owners and has been blind to the full facts of the case - in fact in the rushed process did they even gather the full facts - it would seem not. The AC seized on a few leaked emails to quickly - very quickly - create a narrative and cheered on by Tabas’s et al it assumed a guilty verdict. The facts upon which guilt was ascribed were never tested to any reasonable degree I.e. in a court the prosecution is challenged by the defence, but in the AC the defence were never called. This was a rushed kangaroo court that delivered a result that the majority of those with power inside UEFA longed for... but that doesn’t make it the right decision, it doesn’t make it a balanced decision and importantly in certain situations and in certain cultures bright, smart intelligent people do not always act with precision or integrity. Someone, has got this very badly wrong and looking at the two organisations ADUG and UEFA I think I know which one is acting with a clear head.

Your point about the sort of culture in corrupt organisations is well made. Arrogant people do behave stupidly and irrationally. I always think back to Michel Platini who on the surface seems to be intelligent. Yet he took a payment of £1.35m direct into his bank account (at the time of the Qatar World Cup bid) from Blatter with no contract or even a receipt. It was essentially a cash transfer. This happened in 2011 and Platini claimed it was payment for consultancy work done more than ten years earlier (between 1998 and 2002). It finished his career. How stupid was that?

 

[KS55]

An interesting side story to this is Newcastle, there is an argument on City getting in before the draw bridge was closed and we are and have become one of the strongest teams within. This case will cement that or weaken us for a period, but regardless we are in for the long term.

Newcastle are not in, yet will have the financial strength to scare the G14.

The last thing they want at this point is City going after FFP and dare I say it City board (as a fan I don’t agree with it) would also want FFP.

Whether in this cloaks and daggers world this will have any effect, but I do think G14/ UEFA will have one eye on Newcastle at this time as well...

If the takeover happens, Newcastle will be in a very interesting position. On the one hand, they will have plenty of money and the 'new owner' provisions of FFP will theoretically allow them to spend it.
On the other, they will have to have a plan to come into compliance within, I think, 3 years. And who approves that plan? Why, UEFA of course.(aka Gill?)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Would you expect this shit storm to come out at our appeal or at a time more suitable. Like just as Henderson steps up to lift the league trophy:-)

As I said yesterday, if the PL is planning on a resumption just after the CAS hearing, that's the perfect time to unleash the shit storm.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

If the takeover happens, Newcastle will be in a very interesting position. On the one hand, they will have plenty of money and the 'new owner' provisions of FFP will theoretically allow them to spend it.
On the other, they will have to have a plan to come into compliance within, I think, 3 years. And who approves that plan? Why, UEFA of course.(aka Gill?)

There's no specified timeline in the latest FFP rules. It was up to 4 years prior to that.

 

[Nellies left peg]

As I said yesterday, if the PL is planning on a resumption just after the CAS hearing, that's the perfect time to unleash the shit storm.

Will get the popcorn and beer at the ready in eager anticipation

 

[KS55]

No. There are issues to be resolved before we get to those.

Firstly, City went to the CAS seeking to have the IC's referral of our case set aside because their procedural breaches made it impossible for the entire process to be prosecuted fairly in the AC. Now, the CAS declined to exercise its power to reverse the IC's ruling on this point at that stage but conceded that it could be a valid argument and that we'd be entitled to put it forward at the current stage, even expressing some sympathy with us on the merits. I assume it's therefore a line of argument that we'll run with again. I'm not sure I'd be confident that it'll be decisive because the AC will have presumably bent over backwards to ensure that any failings on the IC's part can't constitute grounds for the entire process to be binned. However, even if we won't win, this is probably worth pursuing on practical grounds because we have a lot of supporting evidence for the proposition that the procedure is tainted by venality and incompetence and thus depicting an opponent during litigation would generally be seen as helpful from a tactical standpoint.

Secondly, we know from the pleadings in the first CAS case that City are also alleging that the charges of which we've been found guilty this time involve a reopening of the settlement agreement which we entered into with UEFA when taking the "pinch" Khaldoon referred to, and there are no grounds for reopening the settlement in this way. That doesn't involve a consideration of the issues on the merits, either. All we can say here is that the settlement agreement is a document governed by Swiss law and Swiss law does allow such settlements to be reopened in certain circumstances; however, the barrier for doing so is usually very high. I understand from people who know far more than I about this stuff that one of the parties to the agreement having decided that it doesn't fancy the terms and conditions any longer doesn't cut it.

I'm completely guessing here, of course, but I note that our case has been listed for three days and it strikes me that arguing through the above, especially if City have as comprehensive a base of evidence as I suspect we do, could take three days on its own. I therefore wonder if we aren't going for a quick win to knock over the ban at an early stage, reserving the option to go back to the CAS for a later hearing on the merits if we need to with the right to ask for the ban to be suspended at that stage.

On the question of re-opening the old agreement, I'm guessing that UEFA will contend that we deceived them with our submissions and with the accounts that they audited. That might help them, but they would probably need to convince the panel of the deception as a first step. If that failed, the part of the 'charges' relating to those years would fall.