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

[Dirty Harry]

Just as an aside, I’m curious to know what the 63 people who voted ‘Other’ on the poll expect to happen? A 3 year ban maybe? Public flogging for the club officials?

Mine was simply the ban overturned, but not exonerated mate.

 

[KS55]

This was also discussed some time ago, the narrative that we all arrived at was that this would allow the other clubs to catch up to us in terms of signings - I am highly dubious that they have named August as the verdict date

Why would they have to deliberate so long ? And it is telling that it means we cannot plan a transfer window, Even if we get exonerated

Just another way to safeguard other clubs to strengthen - unless we just decide to go into the market anyway

Don't think they have said August verdict. That is the best guess based on previous form.

 

[bluemanchester]

the thing is its not a legal issue here ? its a uefa rule and you play under the rules they setup and they can change them to suit

breaking a law or rule by owning a football club and running it the proper way should never be near a court trying to defending itself. what has sheikh mansour done that is Bad for football or manchester and the uk ?? east manchester and many charities and many other football clubs have benefit from the money city and sheikh mansour have invested in the game

what has united or liverpool and the rest of the so called elite clubs done for their own towns or country ?? and add the big and out of control spiralling debt's they all are running THAT is killing the game and BAD for football

Along the lines of Citys massive spending in Manchester you would think the council would be singing from the rooftops about how good Citys owners have been for Manchester. Or have I missed something.

 

[Shaelumstash]

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.

Be interesting to hear your thoughts from a legal perspective on the following:

It seems clear that the Abu Dhabi Executive Council were funding Etihad’s sponsorship of City, as per the Open Skies report.

It seems that Abu Dhabi did not want to admit to that in their dispute with US airlines in their dispute about state funding.

Fast forward to the UEFA investigation based off Football Leaks and the main accusation seems to be ADUG supplied the funds for the Etihad sponsorship. This may well have been a typo and ADEC was the real source of funds.

We hear City did not comply with UEFA’s investigation because things were being leaked by them at every stage.

It seems likely we would not have provided comprehensive proof of ADEC providing the funding to UEFA in case it was leaked and prejudiced the Open Skies case.

I believe that’s why we appealed to CAS halfway through the investigation, because the leaks were prejudicing the case.

In turn, I believe City didn’t co-operate with the UEFA process because they had no faith that the leaks wouldn’t continue.

So assuming all of the above is true, there are a couple of legal questions that will play a huge part in the success or otherwise of our case.

1. If City provide evidence to CAS that ADEC provided the Etihad funding, would that prejudice the Open Skies case?

2. Could City gain any legal guarantees from UEFA that they will not leak evidence from the CAS trial to the press?

3. If UEFA prove that City did not engage properly in the initial investigation, will City’s argument that they had no faith in the process be a legitimate defence?

My concern is, particularly on point 3, that if City deliberately didn’t engage in the process, does that not mean we will be found guilty anyway?

A good example is being convicted of failing a drugs test because you refused to give a sample.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Don't confuse mediation and arbitration. CAS quite happy to side with one side.

True, but I think there's a lot at stake this time and they will prefer it to go through the highest legal process. I think that we're only at the start of it all.

 

[91:23]

Rob Harris is a cvunt who should be banned from coming anywhere near the Etihad, that fucker boils my piss

Hes just been on Talkshite talking about it as though hes the font of all knowledge. load of shite I text them and told them that if they wish to report accurately on the subject then they need to talk to a proper expert, ie PrestwichBlue

 

[BlueLou82]

Good luck with the hearing guys, wipe the floor with them!!

 

[MillionMilesAway]

that's wrong, the courts have told UEFA time after time that they must adhere to business and employment law

I think that's a different issue.
UEFA need to adhere to business/employment law, and their rules are subject to challenge if desired.

Clubs must adhere to UEFA regulations.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Good luck with the hearing guys, wipe the floor with them!!

Has it started now?

 

[mac]

I have been told from a source on good authority that what he said is 100%true that the British media is full of fucking backstabbing lying turns that wouldn't know a true story of it hit them straight in their fat ugly faces. MS this does not apply to you.