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

[slbsn]

Good argument, if true. But you would have to place huge reliance on those emails representing the action we finally took. Oh, here come the accounts...

Indeed. Unless proved to be wrong, the AUDITED accounts must have primacy.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

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?

To be honest, the Mirror article could be bullshit, and whenever I glance at it, which
isn't often, they are most certainly Rag central, more so than any.

 

[MCC]

Could our irrefutable evidence be a copy of ADUG bank statements around the alleged breach - showing no money wired to Etihad Airways. I presume Mansour could rustle up something up.

And if they want a bank statement from MBZ`s or an AD state fund showing money wired to the Etihad Group around the same time marked..."MCFC Etihad Cash", I`m sure we could rustle something up there too, with signed confirmation from the Bank Manager.

 

[slbsn]

In context - if we had misrepresented our accounts - surely we'd have settled this as a 'technical breach' when UEFA offered us a way out. The implications for City, Abu Dhabi, the Sheikh and Etihad would be catastrophic if this was uncovered at CAS. I know we can never rule anything out but would Khaldoon really be as bullish as he is if he was sitting on what effectively is fraud? Just cant see it, there has to be another explanation.

CAS wouldn't prove anything on the accounts but I agree, having a smell around sets of UK accounts is a serious serious issue for directors, owners and auditors. Multiple regulators could be involved and, critically, fraudulent accounts are a matter of CRIMINAL law and could end in jail for executives. So yes I think its very doubtful those people would risk adverse findings of any sort. Likewise the chances that Silverlake did not do due diligence on them is very slim (incidentally a very interesting article just posted on Silverlake on FT - they are serious players https://www.ft.com/content/cb4f8b5a-07c9-4880-a220-f4f5c56d4735). In short I agree with your assessment.

 

[slbsn]

Could our irrefutable evidence be a copy of ADUG bank statements around the alleged breach - showing no money wired to Etihad Airways. I presume Mansour could rustle up something up.

And if they want a bank statement from MBZ`s or an AD state fund showing money wired to the Etihad Group around the same time marked..."MCFC Etihad Cash", I`m sure we could rustle something up there too, with signed confirmation from the Bank Manager.

I think the audited accounts are the irrefutable evidence but yes bank statements are pretty key too.

 

[willipp]

Could our irrefutable evidence be a copy of ADUG bank statements around the alleged breach - showing no money wired to Etihad Airways. I presume Mansour could rustle up something up.

And if they want a bank statement from MBZ`s or an AD state fund showing money wired to the Etihad Group around the same time marked..."MCFC Etihad Cash", I`m sure we could rustle something up there too, with signed confirmation from the Bank Manager.

Im not sure rustling something up is exactly what we need here. ;)

 

[KS55]

I hope no one here is suggesting dishonesty as a policy.

 

[slbsn]

Would that arguable case be based on what City have allowed them to see? Perhaps fearing the leaks, we've decided to take this out of UEFA to resolve it once and for all, and taken legal advice to create the conditions to do so, once the IC rushed the charge through?

It can only be based on either the leaks or what City sent them or a combination of the 2. Some say its purely based on the leaked docs complete with redaction. If so, I think City win at CAS - such documents prove nothing on their own and are too weak to make inferences that trump the accounts and prior disclosures.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

It can only be based on either the leaks or what City sent them or a combination of the 2. Some say its purely based on the leaked docs complete with redaction. If so, I think City win at CAS - such documents prove nothing on their own and are too weak to make inferences that trump the accounts and prior disclosures.

I see it being a combination of the 2, but I don't see us giving our full hand to them because of the damaging leaks to our rivals whenever we co-operate.

So I can envisage us having a strong case but the case looking compelling from the AC's point of view at the same time, hence this apparent slightly bemusing position we are in at the moment where everyone is confident.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

I hope no one here is suggesting dishonesty as a policy.

In what respect?