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

[Plays By Sense Of Smell]

If the evidence shows we are innocent and UEFA have reviewed the evidence and still found us guilty then they clearly haven't followed procedure because to ignore the evidence is clearly a breach of procedure.

The old, "You must either be shit, stupid or bent." conclusion.

 

[The Colonel]

He said something like "IF they have deceived us......" Then some speculation about punishment. The 'IF' will let him largely off the hook on this particular point, altho' it is not good form for the investigator to talk about punishment before the case has begun.

Exactly, he was playing to his crowd.

 

[Coatigan]

i wonder, even if we are exonerated, wether we’d still have grounds for compensation against UEFA for the damage their process has caused us.

I read somewhere some time ago that both sides agreed not to pursue damages against each other whatever way it goes.

 

[Dirty Harry]

a) we are never going to be able to prove that at CAS
b) this wouldn't be procedural irregularities - this would in essence be a case of bad faith or even "fraud". I don't know what the rules on allegations that the case itself was pure bad faith or illegal manipulation but its a very serious allegation. I would be very surprised if that was a tenet of City's case at CAS
c) if UEFA only went ahead on such grounds, City will win easily on any of the arguments set out and on the factual merits so all good.

Thanks for that mate, I'm aware you've probably forgotten more about the subject than I know (and you're probably very busy too), don't think I agree on the 'never' but that's being pedantic, I still think it would be wise and good practice to put all our concerns on the table at CAS (along with any supporting evidence) so it's on record, along with UEFA's responses to that, should we have a need to take it further.

Seems UEFA have been quite smart in how they've actually played this (in effect maybe even circumnavigating their own process), I think we too have anticipated this, hence the "shocked but not surprised" and the "in the first instance" responses, if so that alone should give us confidence and proof we're thinking ahead and anticipating their moves.

Thanks again ProjectDriver.

 

[KS55]

So, it looks like we are all agreed......City will piss this. :-)

 

[slbsn]

Thanks for that mate, I'm aware you've probably forgotten more about the subject than I know (and you're probably very busy too), don't think I agree on the 'never' but that's being pedantic, I still think it would be wise and good practice to put all our concerns on the table at CAS (along with any supporting evidence) so it's on record, along with UEFA's responses to that, should we have a need to take it further.

Seems UEFA have been quite smart in how they've actually played this (in effect maybe even circumnavigating their own process), I think we too have anticipated this, hence the "shocked but not surprised" and the "in the first instance" responses, if so that alone should give us confidence and proof we're thinking ahead and anticipating their moves.

Thanks again ProjectDriver.

Running weak arguments or unproven allegations is never a good strategy. Tends to waste time, piss judges off, suggests you don't have better arguments. So "never" is of course exaggerated but "in practice, never" is more accurate.

As to whether UEFA have played it well. If they win at CAS, they have. If they lose they haven't.

 

[The Stockport Iniesta]

I read somewhere some time ago that both sides agreed not to pursue damages against each other whatever way it goes.

I doubt that's true mate, seeing as we sought damages at the first hearing, and uefa have decided to fine us 30m euros, which is just another word for damages.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Running weak arguments or unproven allegations is never a good strategy. Tends to waste time, piss judges off, suggests you don't have better arguments. So "never" is of course exaggerated but "in practice, never" is more accurate.

As to whether UEFA have played it well. If they win at CAS, they have. If they lose they haven't.

To be fair mate, at this point I think there's a lot of guess work and supposition as to our evidence (if any) on that part so I think it's premature to conclude anything as weak at this stage, IF we do decide to bring those things to the table, then I think it's a fair assumption our team think it is anything but and will do so in the belief it has merit, I guess we'll find out in the course of time, but I still think it wise, gives UEFA less wiggle room in any future events, that's as I see it anyway, as for the judges getting pissed off, when don't they ;-)!

 

[Akpowell]

So, it looks like we are all agreed......City will piss this. :-)

Let's not throw our caps in the air just yet

 

[Coatigan]

I doubt that's true mate, seeing as we sought damages at the first hearing, and uefa have decided to fine us 30m euros, which is just another word for damages.

Perhaps. Just sharing that i read it somewhere. Wouldn't rush to believe it, but it certainly would not surprise me either given what is at stake.