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

[Winchester]

I really don’t think that has any correlation to the verdict.

Me neither

 

[ancoats]

What the MEN wrote was "both parties expressed their satisfaction with respect to the conduct of the procedure"

hahaha that what i written just in my mind its was easy to spell happy instead of satisfaction

 

[dickie davies]

If it’s a one year ban we are still guilty and will then no doubt be stripped of titles at Liverpool and Rags request.

I keep reading this, yet wasn't the period we were punished for breaking FFP 2012 to 2014 where we won two league titles and a league cup, and we haven't been stripped of those!!!!

 

[Shaggy]

There is absolutely no way you have "heard" anything, let alone that.

Life's a bag of Revels

 

[Delboy352]

“Expert witnesses in various countries”

I wonder if we got Etihad execs involved and other accountants to confirm where the money came from etc.

I would imagine that Infantino would have been a good shout...

 

[Ric]

I keep reading this, yet wasn't the period we were punished for breaking FFP 2012 to 2014 where we won two league titles and a league cup, and we haven't been stripped of those!!!!

I think it’s highly unlikely we will be stripped of any titles, regardless of the outcome at CAS.

 

[Citizen Green]

I'm feeling better than ever today due to a few things:

- The points made by Stefan on the 93:20 pod relating to all the hurdles UEFA would have to clear in order to prove that we had in essence fraudulently inflated our sponsorship deals, a rabbit hole they wouldn't want to go down for a trove of legal reasons.
- City being so aggressive in seeking an exoneration. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever UEFA would have taken a settlement outside of CAS before now had we been willing to, and if we weren't confident of our position we would have been advised to seek one by our legal teams, we had up until last Sunday to do this.
- CAS confirming that input was provided from all over the world can only signal that executives from Etihad as well as auditors and others will have provided comprehensive proof of our innocence of these 'breaches', again putting the burden onto UEFA to prove us wrong, by providing detailed sensitive accounting information.
- Finally we would have provided a much bigger cache of internal communications that we would never have given to UEFA alone, which would finally show how the few emails that were leaked were completely out of context. Remember what is always missed in this, is that Der Speigel apparently had thousands of our internal emails, how many did they leak in total? 10 if that?

Again, this is only my viewpoint, but I feel calmly confident we will be successful.

 

[M18CTID]

Just thinking about the link to the Conn article @projectriver has posted a couple of times. Here it is: https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...accounting-sponsorships-uefa-champions-league It shows quite a bit of detail regarding the issues surrounding the 2014 sanction. Assuming the article is correct, it states that during the first FFP monitoring period, UEFA asked City to provide bank statements for multiple years. City didn’t have it all to hand when asked (and claimed that they told UEFA they would’ve provided them if they’d bothered to ask us again but they didn’t) but did provide 12 months worth of transactions from our online account dating back to Spring 2023. Now if UEFA are saying the current punishment relates to offences dated 2012-2016, then you would have to think that that 12 month snapshot we provided back then would’ve thrown up something untoward if we were up to something along the lines of what we’re now being accused of. However, there’s no indication from Conn that there was anything dodgy in that 12 month extract of transactions that concerned UEFA when we were first sanctioned. They had plenty of other concerns of course which Conn goes into detail about but nothing about the bank records throwing up anything suspicious. Furthermore, the 2014 settlement agreement stated that we would undergo a period of even greater scrutiny from UEFA. I would assume that would include us sending them bank statements for subsequent years until we exited the settlement agreement, so again surely any red flags would’ve been spotted at the time?

 

[Mike Brock]

I'm feeling better than ever today due to a few things:

- The points made by Stefan on the 93:20 pod relating to all the hurdles UEFA would have to clear in order to prove that we had in essence fraudulently inflated our sponsorship deals, a rabbit hole they wouldn't want to go down for a trove of legal reasons.
- City being so aggressive in seeking an exoneration. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever UEFA would have taken a settlement outside of CAS before now had we been willing to, and if we weren't confident of our position we would have been advised to seek one by our legal teams, we had up until last Sunday to do this.
- CAS confirming that input was provided from all over the world can only signal that executives from Etihad as well as auditors and others will have provided comprehensive proof of our innocence of these 'breaches', again putting the burden onto UEFA to prove us wrong, by providing detailed sensitive accounting information.
- Finally we would have provided a much bigger cache of internal communications that we would never have given to UEFA alone, which would finally show how the few emails that were leaked were completely out of context. Remember what is always missed in this, is that Der Speigel apparently had thousands of our internal emails, how many did they leak in total? 10 if that?

Again, this is only my viewpoint, but I feel calmly confident we will be successful.

I like the cut of your gib

 

[Citizen Green]

I'm feeling better than ever today due to a few things:

- The points made by Stefan on the 93:20 pod relating to all the hurdles UEFA would have to clear in order to prove that we had in essence fraudulently inflated our sponsorship deals, a rabbit hole they wouldn't want to go down for a trove of legal reasons.
- City being so aggressive in seeking an exoneration. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever UEFA would have taken a settlement outside of CAS before now had we been willing to, and if we weren't confident of our position we would have been advised to seek one by our legal teams, we had up until last Sunday to do this.
- CAS confirming that input was provided from all over the world can only signal that executives from Etihad as well as auditors and others will have provided comprehensive proof of our innocence of these 'breaches', again putting the burden onto UEFA to prove us wrong, by providing detailed sensitive accounting information.
- Finally we would have provided a much bigger cache of internal communications that we would never have given to UEFA alone, which would finally show how the few emails that were leaked were completely out of context. Remember what is always missed in this, is that Der Speigel apparently had thousands of our internal emails, how many did they leak in total? 10 if that?

Again, this is only my viewpoint, but I feel calmly confident we will be successful.

Oh and, not to forget we signed a settlement in 2014 that covered all of this period with... UEFA