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

[jimmygrimblesboots]

So he's talking bolox then

Like most of us on this thread :)

 

[Saddleworth2]

We're 9 hours ahead of UK.

Of course. My stupid.

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

Which one were you?

Think i was Chelsea at the time

 

[mosssideblue]

Talksport saying a likely one year ban. They must know....

That means we are guilty. Why would CAS lessen the original punishment, doesn't make sense

 

[Marvin]

That stuff from 'Phil in Gibraltar' is almost certainly bullshit but it's very convincing bullshit.

We're pretty sure that despite Tony Evans' nonsense, UEFA's case rested almost exclusively on the hacked emails. They may have relied on some of the stuff that PWC went through in 2014 (hence Evans' reference to evidence we had provided to them) as well but the emails were key.

We've always said as well that the emails were taken out of context. One or two looked very incriminating on the surface but we never saw the full chain. So there was an email that talked about ADUG being part of the money chain but we never saw any response to that, which could have said "None of this money is coming through ADUG" or "Yes but the ADUG contribution will be funded wholly from the Executive Council or the Crown Prince Court". We know that at least for the early part of the Etihad sponsorship, it was certainly funded by the Executive Council so that's entirely possible. UEFA may not like that but basically it's none of their business and there's nothing they can do.

So I could well imagine a scenario at CAS where UEFA claim that the Etihad ownership was disguised owner investment, on the basis of the emails. CAS then ask our legal team about that and we produce solid evidence of transactions from the Crown Prince Court or Executive Council regarding the Etihad Sponsorship that completely exonerate ADUG/Sheikh Mansour. So CAS turn to UEFA's legal team and ask them to comment and they say "But we've these hacked emails...".

It's an arbitration hearing, not a trial, so maybe even UEFA's legal team had to eventually accept, in front of the panel, that there was no disguised owner investment. Whether that's how it works I don't know but it's possible that we came out of that hearing 99% certain we'd won.

I always thought the UEFA line that City had inflated the Etihad sponsorship was weak and it would be easy to beat.

I hope there is some way that City can act against UEFA because if what we have heard is correct, there's no way this case should have got past the UEFA Adjudicatory Chamber and it's done a lot of damage to City. Damages claim?

It’s part of the process Marvin. The CAS rules themselves state that the parties find out first. That is common procedure for Arbitration’s worldwide. Finding out at 9am on Monday is not the “before” that they are talking about either. It will have been either Wednesday or Thursday ie 24-48 hours prior to the original date of Friday.
From experience the results are normally emailed to the Lawyers first who then inform the parties. I do Not know if CAS publishes decisions simultaneously but I doubt it. I suspect It may be nearer 10am when the City and Uefa statements are released that we actually know. Sorry to put a dampener on all you 9.30am alarm setters.

Well if Pep knows, then we know:)

 

[DrBlueBob]

,this is a long thread, I've just skipped 50 pages, why does it matter when our execs found out the result ? does it really matter what the fuck pearce had on the side line as his mascot(it was a horse) and who gives a fuck about old Latin teachers.

4227 pages and as usual 4216 is off topic bullshit, i dont give a fuck about your teachers, and i don't give a fuck about pearce,

oh and all the fucking lawyer types waggling their dicks


GOOD MORNING BLUE MOON :)

I thought that you were going fishing today.

 

[SouthStandStander]

,this is a long thread, I've just skipped 50 pages, why does it matter when our execs found out the result ? does it really matter what the fuck pearce had on the side line as his mascot(it was a horse) and who gives a fuck about old Latin teachers.

4227 pages and as usual 4216 is off topic bullshit, i dont give a fuck about your teachers, and i don't give a fuck about pearce,

oh and all the fucking lawyer types waggling their dicks


GOOD MORNING BLUE MOON :)

You know the answer don't you frog.
Dont read the fucking thread then.

MORNING

 

[BringBackSwales]

This is the first season for a while they have finished above us ;-)

Lol, true

 

[Sir peace frog]

I thought that you were going fishing today.

NO AND I DIDNT GO FOR MY MEAL,THE MRS TOOK ILL YESTERDAY(oooops) so my birthday weekend has been curtailed, hence the bad mood post ;)

 

[Fordyboy46]

one with a brain on the caf

Even as a Manchester United fan, the moral aspect of this case and Financial Fair Play trumps all else, that being that the advent of Financial Fair Play in the first place is a complete abhorrence.

It's the footballing equivalent of an upcoming legal battle between a rich man and a poor man. The rich man can afford one of the top lawyers in the land, whilst the poor man can only have a fair chance of competing with the rich man in the upcoming legal battle if he secures outside financial investment to hire a lawyer of equal standing to the rich man's. The rich man however, given his significant influence with the lawmakers of the land, colludes with them to create a new rule that prohibits the poor man from using his outside financial investment towards his lawyer's fees. The rich man can then trounce the poor man on a legal battlefield totally tilted against the poor man from the start.

Owners should be allowed to invest in the playing staff of their football clubs. One can talk about an annual transfer net spend limit of maybe around £80m for ALL CLUBS in order to stop the market becoming unsustainably inflated through state-level investment, but the current FFP mantra of "big clubs can spend lots, small clubs can stay in their box" is bull.

and one so desperate it's funny as fuck.
enjoy .


While this is a well thought out argument, I don’t think the solution is as simple as you say. FFP should be more nuanced, but something like it needs to stay to protect clubs from the very owners that are being defended here.

What would happen to City if their owners dropped them tomorrow? Let’s be honest, they have players and staff on very expensive contracts and, allegedly, receiving extra wages under the table.

Do we really think these magical sponsors are going to stay for a few years while they sell off players on impossible contracts? Or are they going to stay and pay well over the odds for inflated sponsorships at a club that doesn’t even fill their own ground on match day, nevermind have a truly global presence?

They are not, and it could destroy the club in very quick fashion.

If City and PSG want to spend the GDP of a small country on players, then they should have challenged FFP as it is written in courts of law and used that investment to get lawyers on the case and reap the rewards from their blossoming academies in the meantime. As well as buying players with genuine revenue. (Which Premier League clubs have a lot of)

Man City didn’t do that, they agreed to the laws, broke them, then tried to cheat to cover it up. The other teams in the competitions that agreed to the same terms were all playing by the rules and lost out on revenue and European competitions because one team decided they were above it.

FFP should absolutely be adapted, and Man City should be allowed to invest and grow within more nuanced parameters. They should be allowed to invest in players and staff from private funds that are considered as such, but they haven’t done that. They overspent widely, were deceitful about where the money was coming from and they continue to pay transfers and inflated salaries that contravene the rules of the competitions they play in.

By all means, let’s challenge FFP and help teams to use private investment to their advantage. Lets not reward cheating and deceitful practices as a means of moving forward.

The twats conveniently forget they have the biggest wage bill in English football and that they've spent the GDP of a small country on transfers. Deluded ****s.