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.

Prestwich_Blue

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 Jan 2006
Messages
51,016
Location
Wherever I lay my hat that's my home
OK, I'll try it this way.
If the CAS find we have a case to answer and uphold the ban, effectively that investigation by senior judges finds that the books were cooked and implies breaches of the Companies Act. However they are not empowered to take action under that Act so will do nothing other than submit their findings to the two parties. City and UEFA. They may issue some brief of an overview of the proceedings with the outcome in their reports.
You're adding 2+2 and coming up with something other than 4. You're mixing up the Companies Act with a set of reporting rules for a private organisation.

If Etihad gave us £5m and we reported that as £50m, we'd be inflating our revenue and profits by £45m. That could well be an offence under the Companies Act. It would certainly be a breach of FFP.

If, however, Etihad pay us £50m even though only £5m was "their" money and the rest came from Sheikh Mansour or the Executive Council, as long as we record that as a £50m receipt, then we've committed no offence under Company law. We may have breached FFP in certain circumstances though.
 
Last edited:

Didsbury Dave

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 Feb 2007
Messages
30,620
Haha. I'm fucking hilarious, rest assured!
Good to see you post again mate. Hope you’re well.

I share your cynicism of the “smoking gun”/irrefutable proof. If you have something like that you don’t pull it out like a rabbit from a hat in court. You use it to stop the court ever taking place with all its financial and image costs. I think some fans have been carried away by the club’s bullishness: you have to be bullish about your own evidence; it’s part of the game.

I’d take a one year ban right now and my suspicion is that’s what we will get.
 

BillyShears

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 Aug 2004
Messages
8,096
Location
King Kunta
They are all fire proof. Pearce's leaked emails were the worst of the lot, and he had far emails hacked in a separate leaks regarding PR and influence of the UAE which caused far more trouble than any City/FFP. leaks

Every action we have taken with regards to FFP has been agreed above Soriano.Everybody is complicit. He is also the architect of the Global CFG project and there is no chance his position will be under threat.

The idea that City will sack him and go into the market for a new CEO if we get banned is just not gonna happen.
I'm almost convinced by this post and a few others about Soriano that maybe he's too deeply embedded in the club to lose his job over something like this.
 

BillyShears

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 Aug 2004
Messages
8,096
Location
King Kunta
Good to see you post again mate. Hope you’re well.

I share your cynicism of the “smoking gun”/irrefutable proof. If you have something like that you don’t pull it out like a rabbit from a hat in court. You use it to stop the court ever taking place with all its financial and image costs. I think some fans have been carried away by the club’s bullishness: you have to be bullish about your own evidence; it’s part of the game.

I’d take a one year ban right now and my suspicion is that’s what we will get.
A 1 year ban, in a season which will be played behind closed doors and could be disrupted, isn't a big deal for me. I really fear the 2 year ban.
 

Didsbury Dave

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 Feb 2007
Messages
30,620
A 1 year ban, in a season which will be played behind closed doors and could be disrupted, isn't a big deal for me. I really fear the 2 year ban.
Yeah, I agree. A two year ban would be catastrophic. The costs could be half a billion. It might even be the final straw for Abu Dhabi.
 

Citizen Green

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Messages
6,473
Location
CAS
Team supported
Manchester City FC
A 1 year ban, in a season which will be played behind closed doors and could be disrupted, isn't a big deal for me. I really fear the 2 year ban.
My thoughts exactly, I'm of the opinion that the club may be best taking this offer if it becomes clear we won't be getting a full exoneration, rather than taking this further again to the Swiss courts.
 

Centurions

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Sep 2012
Messages
11,317
Location
Not 100% sure at the moment...
I feel that Soriano is insulated because there's been so much investment into CFG which is his brainchild. He oversees 9 clubs with more in the pipeline.

Txiki on the other hand...if Pep is leaving next season, he loses his armour anyway.
Txiki is director of football, although I don't know his full remit I don't think he has much input on the FFP side (or does he?).
 

blue roo

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 Mar 2007
Messages
851
Location
Perth Australia
Good to see you post again mate. Hope you’re well.

I share your cynicism of the “smoking gun”/irrefutable proof. If you have something like that you don’t pull it out like a rabbit from a hat in court. You use it to stop the court ever taking place with all its financial and image costs. I think some fans have been carried away by the club’s bullishness: you have to be bullish about your own evidence; it’s part of the game.

I’d take a one year ban right now and my suspicion is that’s what we will get.
Yep , if there was a bookies market on the outcome , I would ‘lump on’ a year ban right now.
 

Exeter Blue I am here

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
7,874
Location
Take a wild guess.......
OK, I'll try it this way.
If the CAS find we have a case to answer and uphold the ban, effectively that investigation by senior judges finds that the books were cooked and implies breaches of the Companies Act. However they are not empowered to take action under that Act so will do nothing other than submit their findings to the two parties. City and UEFA. They may issue some brief of an overview of the proceedings with the outcome in their reports.

It has already been stated that the Premier League have been investigating the same allegations made by Dr Spiegel and codified by UEFAs charges into the submission of incorrect accounts. So the first question is, if UEFA uphold the ban and fine in any combination do you think the Premier League will not investigate further?

Do not kid yourself if we get found to have done what is alleged do you believe we will get an easy ride from the British press and the rest of the hateful eight etc? There will be a huge demand for exemplary action. I fully expect a demand for points taken away and redistribution of League Titles etc to be openly banded about as punishment or perhaps you think they'll take it easy on us? I suspect not.

It naturally follows if that happens that such a huge case in the UK indicating we have breached the Companies Act will alert both the Police and CPS. There may well be such a referral to them from the Premier League or from hundreds of "well intentioned" private citizens or other aggrieved football clubs or members of the press due to their outrage at such blatant disregard for the law. Do you not naturally see where it goes? If the general public are seemingly outraged the Police will feel compelled to act under the "public interest" elements of the law.

I make these comments not out of any wish for this to pass but over 25 years experience of legal process and because some blues are quite glib about "Accepting a 1 year ban" and that acceptance clearly indicates a tacit submission of guilt.

Does anyone think the powers that be will be allowed to sweep this under the carpet should the CAS outcome not be favourable? Do you not think Steven Gerrard (who's a keen observer of the outcome) et al will sit back and do nothing along with Liverpool FC who are likely to whip up an absolute storm in their indignation?

Perhaps they'll just let us off!

So when you say there's "No chance" this will lead to criminal charges at home perhaps I'll politely disagree.

Of course it's all speculation at this stage and I hope we have sufficient evidence to exonerate the club completely and none of this will mean a thing.
What truly irks with all of this shit is that our ‘crime’ amounts to no more than wanting to be allowed to spend the same amount of money as the old guard and to compete on a level playing field (and even now the highest wage bill and squad cost belongs to United, not us). The punishment we will get however, if we are found guilty of undermining the laughably named Financial ‘Fair’ Play rules, will be so utterly disproportionate to the offence, that it will make transportation to Van Diemen’s Land for stealing a turnip, seem like Steven Gerrard getting found not guilty by a jury of Scousers after he blatantly and publicly beat up a DJ. I have not the slightest doubt that all of what you say above is true, albeit that PB has qualified the Company Law angle for us. The intention of the rags and the dippers, et al, is to ruin us completely and irrevocably, and they will leave no stone unturned, no smear story unleaked, in their quest to achieve that. If we don’t win this case then we are quite likely to be utterly fucked, and if our enemies can leverage the Premier League to relegate us and strip us of our titles then they surely will.
The positive point, and Dear God I pray it wasn’t an elaborate bluff, is that whatever his briefing was, we gave Ceferin short shrift, an act which points to supreme confidence amongst the club’s hierarchy. The negative is the concern, IMO, that whatever leaks and dodges UEFA have or have not been responsible for during the process, will ultimately sit as second fiddle to our ability to discredit the content of those emails, whatever their provenance, and I don’t think CAS will view City opting not to do that on the grounds that they were hacked or were taken out of context, in a positive light. I hope then that we have that evidence, and if we do, then I don’t understand why we have not produced it sooner, and our failure (as far as we know) to have done so, makes me very wary of how this is all going to pan out
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.