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

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%
  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%
  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%

  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
The reason for my confidence is that if the ban was upheld, I'm bloody sure we'd have heard about it before now.
When the ban was first imposed, it was on every media outlet known to man. I was at work and non football
people were informing of me it. I got home and couldn't get the news off my TV. Think it was even on babest QVC.
It was on the main BBC evening news but you can be sure that when we are cleared it will not be covered by them.
 
Has there been anyone who does not have a connection with City, beit a blue moon poster, a city journo, or former player that has said the club will win the case?

It seems to me that for something so clear cut it is strange that no one outside of the City circle thinks the club have won, or even think the club has a chance really, unless I have missed it of course.

The argument put forward tends to be any negative rumour is a kfa and is wrong but is that just confirmation bias as we are all desperate for the club to win so we only acknowledge a good news story.

If we believe someone like Ian Cheeseman knows then surely a lot of other people would know as well especially journalists and they are not saying we have won.

Bloody hope we have done though but this reminds me a lot of when we thought we won last time, city connections saying yes and everybody else saying no.
 
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.
Was probably 50/50 till Peps interview on match of the day, only thing missing was are feeling confident oh yes we already know we've won !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.