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

[citizenyank76]

I am so sick of being poked and prodded. I know some very competent high profile lawyers who would have a field day with this shit. You can only use the media and public dialog for so long. I hope we know every angle in the court room to geld these fuckers by the balls!

 

[Postman Pep]

Yep, he's an Arsenal loving **** who is going to find his mobile number posted on here before much longer.

Allegedly, of course.

He's a simpleton. Conveniently, for a supposed expert on the subject matter, he elected not to mention that the hacked documents relate to the period already sanctioned for.

He's in big trouble, as he accused us of failing twice and still manipulating the books.

He's finished.

I hope you're right but considering talkshite tweeted the whiny ****z vitriol shortly afterwards they didn't seem to have a problem with it.

 

[@BluePhil8]

I tried to get a hold of the first released thing, since he and other journalists are pretending it’s not edited, I found this from yesterday but it’s trying to get me to subscribe to New York Times any differences?

https://web.archive.org/web/2019051...ts/manchester-city-champions-league-uefa.html

According to the people with knowledge of the investigation, City’s punishment most likely will be linked to an accusation that it provided misleading statements in resolving an earlier case, as well as false statements to licensing authorities in England, and not over the true value of the sponsorship agreements. That made the case a curious fit for the financial control officials, who were assigned the case instead of UEFA’s main disciplinary body.

This the bit??

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

If NYT didn't edit out the reference to the source of the story shouldn't they tell us exactly where they got the information from - if we're to have full confidence in the investigatory process UEFA will base their decisions on?

 

[Newquayblue]

Eh up, I think the club statement has been edited, it now reads " “people familiar with the case” is therefore extremely concerning. " -- Is it too early for bed?

 

[Withnail]

Yep, he's an Arsenal loving **** who is going to find his mobile number posted on here before much longer.

Allegedly, of course.

He's a simpleton. Conveniently, for a supposed expert on the subject matter, he elected not to mention that the hacked documents relate to the period already sanctioned for.

He's in big trouble, as he accused us of failing twice and still manipulating the books.

He's finished.

Time to adopt a similar approach with a few more of these obnoxious bile spewing journalists

 

[kaz7]

It seems to me that the club’s suspicion about this being all about targeted attempts to damage our reputation is true.

The more difficult issue for us as fans might be though “what if we go to court and lose”.

What is your view as a fan? I think mine is that if we bent the rules then we did so because we fought fire with fire. Feel a bit blinkered admitting that tho

Every single business of any type bend the rules,it seems we are not allowed to do it,so long as we haven't done anything really terrible i don't think we as fans should be concerned,our job is to support the team on the pitch and leave the rest to the club to deal with

 

[Parisian]

I'm a sick bastard but I am kind of interested to see what 1 season focusing fully on domestic football would look like for us. Guessing we end up with 115 points.

Would not do any good to City.

Reputation would be damaged. Economic damage from non paticipation in UCL and some sponsors clauses (bonuses) prolly.
Players like CL and you have a big squad. Less games played, less game time for some players.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Every single business of any type bend the rules,it seems we are not allowed to do it,so long as we haven't done anything really terrible i don't think we as fans should be concerned,our job is to support the team on the pitch and leave the rest to the club to deal with

Good point well made!

 

[City Man]

According to today's Guardian the club have now said they have provided "comprehensive proof" of their innocence of the allegations. There also seems to be some pushback from the club now with the tone changing significantly. The club have said:

According to the Guardian, the club have upped the ante a bit with their response to the NYT article -

"Responding to a report in the New York Times on Monday that the IC is set to recommend City being banned from the Champions League, the club issued a strongly worded statement saying they have provided proof that the allegations are false.

This would be presumed to include further internal financial evidence and an explanation of the emails. The statement protested that the IC process itself has been the subject of leaks. “Manchester City FC is fully cooperating in good faith with the CFCB IC’s ongoing investigation,” the statement said.

“In doing so the club is reliant on both the CFCB IC’s independence and commitment to due process; and on Uefa’s commitment of the 7th of March that it … will make no further comment on the matter while the investigation is ongoing.

“The New York Times report citing ‘people familiar with the case’ is therefore extremely concerning. The implications are that either Manchester City’s good faith in the CFCB IC is misplaced or the CFCB IC process is being misrepresented by individuals intent on damaging the club’s reputation and its commercial interests. Or both.

“Manchester City’s published accounts are full and complete and a matter of legal and regulatory record. The accusation of financial irregularities are entirely false, and comprehensive proof of this fact has been provided to the CFCB IC.”

A statement from Uefa said: “We do not comment on ongoing investigations regarding financial fair play matters.”

The tone of this statement is completely different from the reserved tone of previous comments (by the way, I like the "or both"). The club have clearly been angered by the way this investigation is being handled. You can see how this could get very dirty if allowed to do so. But far more interesting is the statement that CFCB IC have been given "comprehensive proof" - well, proof is proof so I'll be intrigued to see how this bit pans out. Also, the Guardian's comment about "an explanation of the emails" - well, at the start the club said that the leaked emails were out of context so the Guardian's supposition would fit with the earlier statement, and there may be other emails not leaked that neutralise the "incriminating" ones.

Anyway, I'm going to watch Villa and the Baggies which should be a bit more exciting than this stuff.