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

[whp.blue]

Impressive. Even MC 1-0 UEFA would be a struggle for me.

Years ago, after loosing a bet, I had the name of a Welsh Town tattooed on mine

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

Wonder how many CAS cases have the financial implications of £250m , the amount of income we could lose if we are banned , a lot CAS decisions are for individuals , i think Mutu lost his case and was instructed to pay £25m to Chelsea , he still hasnt paid a cent after 12 years and the dispute is ongoing
Maybe we can spin the UEFA fine out for a decade or more and keep their lawyers busy ,if we lose the next step is a Swiss law tribunal if that fails european courts , make UEFA work for their blood money

 

[Marvin]

What is the case, however, is that as we get closer to the official announcement date of 13 Jul, the more likelihood that the parties will have been told. If there are still positive vibes coming out of the club by the weekend (and zilch from the usual UEFA leaks) that would probably be a good sign.

There again, they may be told an hour before the announcement - what do I know...

And to muddy the water still further what if the ruling was to reduce it to a 1 year ban? How then would you read the parties response in the media?

 

[Gremlin]

Years ago, after loosing a bet, I had the name of a Welsh Town tattooed on mine

Usk?

 

[Paladin]

Years ago, after loosing a bet, I had the name of a Welsh Town tattooed on mine

Was it Cwm?

 

[ganganvince]

Years ago, after loosing a bet, I had the name of a Welsh Town tattooed on mine

Which one?

 

[John Wayne]

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.

This is exactly as I see it.

City may have been able to all along provide independent evidence to corroborate our claims that our sponsorship revenue came from an unrelated party. The club chose not to provide UEFA with this evidence (non-co-operation) on account of Yves Leterme "previewing" our punishment in 2018 and the leaks to the press. I place great weight on both of these occurrences influencing our response. The club's statement is very important in understanding that we could not trust the UEFA process and sought to bypass them in order to make our case.

There may also be people in Abu Dhabi willing to provide evidence to CAS but who the club were not willing to expose to a flawed and corrupt UEFA investigation, largely due to the leaking of confidential information.

 

[M18CTID]

Years ago, after loosing a bet, I had the name of a Welsh Town tattooed on mine

Was it Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch?

 

[Shaelumstash]

There is certainly no way that of last night they had heard they had lost. Won maybe. Probably didn't know. https://www.mancity.com/citytv/mens/txiki-begiristain-david-silva-63729838

Great video that, he looks very relaxed.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

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

I would have thought that CAS can only judge on what the appellant has appealed and the narrative from City is that we have proof of compliance, and I can't see any official documents describing the nature of our appeal other than this. Unless the precedent is that CAS understand that appellants who have their cases dismissed then usually go on to appeal the level of the punishment and so they also then judge that side as well so as to avoid further appeals and other potential legal processes. I would have thought the next step would be, if we don't prevail, that we have to appeal again against the sentence and, if we want it to be delayed to allow entry into next year's competition while our appeal is heard, possibly go to court to prevent UEFA enforcing the punishment immediately. I don't think we'd do the latter but we might still appeal via CAS.

All moot hopefully.