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

[The Stockport Iniesta]

The very idea that a regulatory body, deems itself to be God, and lays down a commandment, that as a business you shall not be allowed to invest more than we say you can, It's pretty ludicrous if you think about it.

Dodgy ground? More like sinking sand if it were challenged under the right circumstances.

 

[slbsn]

Trabzonspor have been given a one-season ban from European football over Financial Fair Play breaches.

Uefa said the Super Lig leaders had failed to meet an agreement reached in 2016, when the club were found to have breached the rules.

The ban will apply if they qualify for Europe next season or in 2021-22, but will not be implemented after that.

The FFP rules were introduced in 2011, designed to stop teams spending more money than they generate themselves.

AC Milan and Manchester City have both been barred from European football for breaking the rules, although the latter have launched an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which will begin next week.

Another one of the cases where a team fails to meet the settlement agreement. This is a critical and important difference from the City case. City definitively came out of the settlement regime in respect of its settlement agreement. Its a key plank of City's argument - how can UEFA reopen a closed settlement?

 

[hihosilva]

Do we get a running commentary next week

 

[KS55]

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.

Thanks for your interventions. You know a lot more than we generally do, so your comments are most welcome. Agree entirely with this view. Stick to the knitting.

 

[bluwes]

Stefans on a roll tonight

 

[Ancient Citizen]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/premier-league/man-city-set-for-lengthy-uefa-b
an-appeal-leading-to-premier-league-confusion/ar-BB14ZjqJ?li=BBoPWjP

This is saying there could be a delay in announcing the verdict.
Apologies if already posted.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

^^^^^^^^

Apologies if not showing, article is in the Mirror.

 

[Prater70]

If it is a three day hearing and then a wait of two months for a verdict, how come Tolmie, Khaldoon and Soriano are so bullish?

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

So, I'm struggling after nearly two years to understand what City has done which constitutes "serious breaches" of UEFA's regulations. I need help to see whether I am anywhere near seeing the case clearly.

Back in 2013 Etihad were unable to afford the full cost of the instalment due on their sponsorship agreement with the club, though our accounts record the payment as made in full by the airline. A hacker stole unlimited numbers of emails, some of which were stolen from City and it was one of these which Der Spiegel chose to publish. Parts of the email were blacked out but the email was from an important executive at the club and it claimed that "HH" would have to meet much of the cost of the sponsorship for that year. UEFA argue that "HH" is Sheikh Mansour and that the sponsorship is simply a means to disguise owner investment. City argue that "HH" is not Sheikh Mansour at all as anyone with knowledge of protocol in the UAE would know and so there has been no owner investment and no disguise. Negotiations in the USA about state funding of airlines give support to City's contention and Etihad have issued a statement saying that they met all the obligations of the sponsorship.

If that outline is correct an email is of no weight whatsoever, especially in redacted form, because it isn't any kind of record of what actually happened. The explicit claim that this was disguised owner investment almost certainly broadens City's case to argue that FFP is inconsistent with commercial/competition law and therefore there is no case to answer.

Like PD I am at a loss to imagine how UEFA can prove (rather than simply suspect as I think they do) that City have breached the regulations. And yet the judgement may not be made public for 3 months?!

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Interesting that mid August is now a Mirror exclusive https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/man-city-set-lengthy-uefa-22134478

CAS ‘sources’ have ‘revealed’ that the decision ‘could take up to two months’. Yet more high class investigative journalism there.....