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

[BringBackSwales]

He’s anything but Man City Loyal

AHIARFC

 

[bluealf]

Been told non of our solicitors showed up so we’re being represented last minute by Saul Goodman.

Better than Lionel Hutz though :)

 

[BringBackSwales]

News just in, Khaldoon has been spotted running around the court house swinging his blazer in the air with an Irishman shouting 'stupendous'... more to follow.

Well I never knew that martin tyler was Irish

 

[petrusha]

I'm also pretty happy that CAS will do their job impartially, and that City wouldn't risk this without having a good case - that would be very odd behaviour.

I suspect one issue (for the layman, myself included) may be having expectations based on an incomplete misunderstanding of the CAS process. @projectriver has shown up a fair bit of that, and I expect the next three days to show more.

My issue in terms of knowing what's going on is that, while UEFA have accused us of serious breaches that entail our overstating sponsorship income, we know literally nothing about how we're alleged to have done so and how that squares with other information in the public domain. I didn't vote in the poll that appeared on this thread, since, without an assessment of that information, any vote in the poll is worthless.

Meanwhile, the campaign continues to build a narrative discrediting any possible City victory at CAS. This tweet, from our old friend Tariq Panja, suggests that, if City win, it will be through our wealth forcing UEFA to cave. I wouldn't call this even disingenuous - it's an outright lie that City prevailing would be because UEFA "let it happen". If City win, it will be because a neutral tribunal composed of respected arbitrators found our case more persuasive than UEFA's. If they uphold UEFA's position in full or in part, then they weren't persuaded by our position. Simple as that.

 

[hihosilva]

When you come out with statments like " We have a comprehensive body of irrefutable evedence" those are strong words.
These are not the words of UEFA but from Manchester City!
This fills me with confidence that this ban will be thrown out.

 

[KS55]

Yes. I'd put big money on there being a clause that says words to the effect "Nothing in this Agreement or any related document shall be construed as constituting an admission of any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever by either of the Parties or be admissible in any proceedings as evidence of liability or wrongdoing by either of the Parties." It may also say: "The Parties acknowledge and agree that there is a possibility that, after settling this matter, it will discover facts which were unknown or unsuspected at the time, and which if known by such Party at the time of this settlement might have materially affected its decision to settle this matter and the Parties are assuming any risk of such unknown facts and such unknown and unsuspected claims"

Typical City................lawyer.

 

[manimanc]

My issue in terms of knowing what's going on is that, while UEFA have accused us of serious breaches that entail our overstating sponsorship income, we know literally nothing about how we're alleged to have done so and how that squares with other information in the public domain. I didn't vote in the poll that appeared on this thread, since, without an assessment of that information, any vote in the poll is worthless.

Meanwhile, the campaign continues to build a narrative discrediting any possible City victory at CAS. This tweet, from our old friend Tariq Panja, suggests that, if City win, it will be through our wealth forcing UEFA to cave. I wouldn't call this even disingenuous - it's an outright lie that City prevailing would be because UEFA "let it happen". If City win, it will be because a neutral tribunal composed of respected arbitrators found our case more persuasive than UEFA's. If they uphold UEFA's position in full or in part, then they weren't persuaded by our position. Simple as that.

Who is this twat panja? Is he another nobhead like deloony, thinking he's in the know but knows the sum of fuck all.
Jesus these social media warriors think they are 10 men.

 

[zoomzoom]

Are we having sweep on the time of the first UEFA leak to the gutter press of how the CAS hearing is looking bad for City?
They have leaked like a sieve all through this so I don't expect it to change now.

 

[chesterbells]

AHIARFC

Haha

 

[MillionMilesAway]

My issue in terms of knowing what's going on is that, while UEFA have accused us of serious breaches that entail our overstating sponsorship income, we know literally nothing about how we're alleged to have done so and how that squares with other information in the public domain. I didn't vote in the poll that appeared on this thread, since, without an assessment of that information, any vote in the poll is worthless.

Meanwhile, the campaign continues to build a narrative discrediting any possible City victory at CAS. This tweet, from our old friend Tariq Panja, suggests that, if City win, it will be through our wealth forcing UEFA to cave. I wouldn't call this even disingenuous - it's an outright lie that City prevailing would be because UEFA "let it happen". If City win, it will be because a neutral tribunal composed of respected arbitrators found our case more persuasive than UEFA's. If they uphold UEFA's position in full or in part, then they weren't persuaded by our position. Simple as that.

Yes, not knowing what City have or haven't done but are accused of makes expectation faith more than anything.

City are always going to be the club "who were accused and found guilty of" shenanigans, that's a certainty. Other than blocking approaches for help from hacks who peddle that, I'm not sure there's much that can be done.