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

[shevtheblue]

The club never agreed with the terms of the settlement agreement but signed up to it for the interests of preserving a relationship with UEFA (something they've now decided was pointless and so are fighting hard). The settlement agreement set out a list of restrictions/terms with which City had to comply over the following financial periods in order for UEFA to be satisfied there were no further breaches of FFP. We did comply.

The emails then came out which called into question what we had provided to UEFA previously, with UEFA believing we had falsified accounts in order to comply. They've therefore reissued a punishment on an accounting period covered by the settlement agreement. The club would argue that we were already punished and had complied with a settlement, and UEFA had an agenda against us. UEFA will undoubtedly be saying we didn't provide evidence to dismiss the suggestion of falsifying accounts as shown in the hacked emails.

The club, in my opinion, have clearly decided not to try too hard to give UEFA what they need. Potentially concerned by the fact they were leaking information, and also because of their agenda against the club. Instead, we've probably shared what we needed to with CAS in order to make this whole thing go away. I'm confident this is the case because of Ferran's "irrefutable evidence" claim. If this was just a question of procedure, and whether UEFA could re-open something after it had already been settled, I'd be less confident.

Thanks, i think that answers pretty much everything. With what Sorriano has shared about our evidence, if we are still found guilty then you'd assume him and some of the others would have a lot to answer for.

 

[Gremlin]

I’m surprised BT are showing it considering City are the only English team left in it.

Not strictly speaking true as Chelsea still have the second leg of their last 16 tie to play, like us. Granted they have their work cut out overturning a 3-0 deficit against Bayern but that will just give BT more excuses to show how Liverpool turned it around last year...

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Fair point, personally speaking I don't think we, ll get banned at all but one year ban is the worst that could happen.

I am erring on the side of the appeal being upheld myself but either we convince CAS that our evidence proves compliance or UEFA convince them that their evidence proves failure to comply. I struggle to find the in-between situation that would result in CAS saying UEFA were right but we think the punishment is too harsh, because I doubt we have appealed the punishment if we were convinced of our side. Saying that we are innocent and then saying "but if you find us guilty" is a weak approach.

 

[cityzen81]

If we lose the appeal will we appeal to a higher court and if so will we be allowed to play in the next year's competition whilst the appeal is going through the courts

Unfortunately it looks like CAS is the final stage of this appeal.

If we went to Swiss Courts after this it would be to challenge FFP as a restriction of trade not to challenge the CAS verdict

 

[cptaidan88]

I’m surprised BT are showing it considering City are the only English team left in it.

Chelsea are still in it in the sense they have their 2nd leg to play. Turning around a 3-0 deficit, away at Bayern would be an impressive feat, although Bayern wont have played a game for a month at that stage.

 

[Ardwick Green Blue]

Previously I thought at worst we would have the ban reduced to one season but now I feel that there are only two options - fully exonerated or the full sanctions upheld.

The club have bet the house on being exonerated and there is no halfway house.

Gulp....

 

[Gremlin]

Unfortunately it looks like CAS is the final stage of this appeal.

If we went to Swiss Courts after this it would be to challenge FFP as a restriction of trade not to challenge the CAS verdict

I think it has been said that the CAS decision could be challenged in the Swiss courts but, as ProjectRiver noted in a previous post, that is rarely successful so we may need to seek a different avenue.

 

[M18CTID]

Why?

Genuine question btw. It's my interpretation, and your interpretation, we are both making assumptions on loose observations of what is available in the public realm, so in no way am i looking to argue it, just curious what you base that on.

The Cas procedure states the parties are notified, once the decision is reached, ahead of the verdict being written up and made public. It doesn't say when that is or should be. There is then another period of 3 months where they pull together the full justification, and that period is stated as 3 months.

So in reality, both parties (or should i say any two parties) Could theoretically know a week after a hearing, if that is when Cas reach a decision. Not saying that is what may have happened, just that no timeframe is impossible.

Imho, Cas wouldn't have defined a date for public announcement, without having made a decision. And if they notify parties once they make a decision, ahead of writing up the verdict, it is entirely plausible the club have known since we have known the date. After all, that is what, leas than 2 full weeks before the public announcement? or in fact bang on one week before the supposed original planned date of the 10th. That isn't actually that far in advance, imho, i doubt cas judges write up the verdict in less than a week.

Which, as i say, councides with pep's positive comments, and other reported injection of optimism throughout the club that TH and a few with links have reported.

Add to that Uefa asking the announcement to be delayed, heck even coupled with a silence from Uefa, which, as crudely cynical as it sounds, to me there is a nugget of truth behind that throwaway joke.


As i say, that is what i believe, at this point. Largely, because i really want to, and particularly, because it does make some sense, and does add up to an extent (or coincides quite neatly).

Fair enough. When you put it like that, it sounds plausible that the club already knows. I just wouldn’t expect both sides to be informed of the verdict weeks in advance of CAS announcing it publically but you’ve just presented quite a convincing argument for that to be the case.

 

[Citizen in Pakistan]

I am erring on the side of the appeal being upheld myself but either we convince CAS that our evidence proves compliance or UEFA convince them that their evidence proves failure to comply. I struggle to find the in-between situation that would result in CAS saying UEFA were right but we think the punishment is too harsh, because I doubt we have appealed the punishment if we were convinced of our side. Saying that we are innocent and then saying "but if you find us guilty" is a weak approach.

Yes I totally agree, most likely it will be one way or the other. However, there are precedents i believe for bans getting reduced, i am not sure if they would apply in our case though

 

[Citizen Green]

Not really sure what the question is. City say the 2014 settlement and the settlement regime closed the book on the periods under investigation. The settlement is unlikely to be binding under Swiss Law unfortunately (it was never approved by a court or tribunal) so it is unclear how CAS will deal with it. UEFA will probably be able to argue the case on its merits and CAS will have to decide if we actually did breach as UEFA claim.

What exactly have we breached though? This is what I don’t understand, the money is in the accounts directly from Etihad and others, confirmed by audits.

I just don’t get how we get to this point based on those emails, how can it even be proven one way or another.