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

[Newman Noggs]

I’m guessing the reason it wouldn’t be in the public interest is because the tax man hasn’t been cheated out of any money. He’s gained, if anything.

This is right. The idea that a company's directors would be prosecuted for putting money into their own company is ludicrous. In the worst case scenario, and going along with the idea that such an investment was disguised in the accounts, what is the damage ? Who are the victims ? And if you think that law enforcement might pursue it because people are interested or to set an example, ask yourself what the likely outcome would be. No victims = technical offence. It just wouldn't happen.

Believe me, the SFO has plenty of real fraud with real victims to think about without getting involved in football politics.

At best you might have a civil action by the clubs deemed to have been harmed by breach of the FFP rules but nothing else.

 

[Ric]

I'm pretty sure that it's an old quote the FT included in a piece when the ban was imposed. I remember seeing it before.

You're correct. They used pretty much the exact same quote in an article dated February 18th 2020:
https://www.ft.com/content/c8e25054-519a-11ea-8841-482eed0038b1

According to a person with knowledge of the case, Uefa investigators even hired outside lawyers for the first time in an effort to build a watertight case that could avoid the fate of past FFP inquiries — such as against Paris Saint-Germain, AC Milan and Galatasaray — where sanctions were overturned for technical legal reasons. “Provided Uefa don’t cave in they should win at CAS,” the person said, adding that it would be “very difficult” for Uefa “to back down on this one”.

Edit: sorry just seen @Centurions post linking the same article.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Yep, back on 18th of February.

https://www.ft.com/content/c8e25054-519a-11ea-8841-482eed0038b1

That's just lazy journalism.

And this old FT story was published on the same day Nasser Al Khelaifi, one of the UEFA architects of City's CL ban along with Yves Leterme, was charged with corruption by the Swiss authorities (for his criminal activity while at FIFA). That's the sort of information you might expect to see published in a paper like the Finanacial Times but this story has hardly been touched by the UK media. I wonder why.

 

[projectriver]

This is right. The idea that a company's directors would be prosecuted for putting money into their own company is ludicrous. In the worst case scenario, and going along with the idea that such an investment was disguised in the accounts, what is the damage ? Who are the victims ? And if you think that law enforcement might pursue it because people are interested or to set an example, ask yourself what the likely outcome would be. No victims = technical offence. It just wouldn't happen.

Believe me, the SFO has plenty of real fraud with real victims to think about without getting involved in football politics.

At best you might have a civil action by the clubs deemed to have been harmed by breach of the FFP rules but nothing else.

This just isn't correct. Nothing to do with tax. Victims? Customers, fans of other clubs, suppliers, competitors, the market due to the alleged distortion of spending - many people could be described as victims if there was a finding that due to false accounts, CFG gained a pre-eminent position in a sport. And squarely in the public interest. I'm not suggesting it will happen, but its perfectly possible to construct the case and whether you agree or not with the victim point, the public interest is obvious and undeniable.

 

[KirkhamBlue62]

This is the crazy situation we have:
A) One (or the G14) club bullies the Authorities to change the proposed regulations that they would fail so that they will pass the amended regulations (even benefit from them)
Verdict - perfectly ok, nothing to criticise.
B) another club is perceived to have broken those new amended regulations by said bully who would have failed them (the public do not even know how specifically)
Verdict - the crime of the century.
No wonder football is in an absolute mess.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Question:

Personally I have no idea what will happen. I don't have a clue even if I was forced at gunpoint to pick.

I know I think FFP is a sham but that’s not going to be relevant to the case itself.

But say City are found guilty by CAS...what will be your first thoughts?

 

[argyle]

Anything less and we would still be facing Premier League sanctions and all that entails.

You really think the other 19 clubs would sit on their hands if we got a one year ban instead of two?

Guilty would be guilty, regardless of a reduced sentence.

People need to understand the gravity of this case, it is all or nothing.

City would be sent into the wilderness for years by a guilty verdict, putting an official stamp on deligitimising every trophy we have won.

That would certainly be in the interim, as we got to the highest courts in the land.

The damage would already been done though.

I do agree with Tugay though, feels like a typical City moment where it will come crashing down.

UEFA will find a way to stitch us up.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Question:

Personally I have no idea what will happen. I don't have a clue even if I was forced at gunpoint to pick.

I know I think FFP is a sham but that’s not going to be relevant to the case itself.

But say City are found guilty by CAS...what will be your first thoughts?

Probably what calibre of firearm was pointed at you.

 

[Prater70]

From Meredith to Agueroooo, these are critical times in the history and future of our great club. Put simply two words will define whether we have reason for celebration or reason to be ridiculed. IRREFUTABLE PROOF. Come on City.!

 

[Centurions]

Question:

Personally I have no idea what will happen. I don't have a clue even if I was forced at gunpoint to pick.

I know I think FFP is a sham but that’s not going to be relevant to the case itself.

But say City are found guilty by CAS...what will be your first thoughts?

Since we know very little of what either side are bringing to the table that's impossible to say I'd have thought? At least we'll know one way or the other shortly (hopefully).