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

[CharliesRightPeg]

I'm pretty sure that Pinto has said numerous times that he didn't hack everything and the bulk of it was passed across by persons unknown.

The accusation against the person's unknown is that they're actually a team of British agents involved in match fixing and other shenanigans to increase the take and exposure of their clients

 

[ganganvince]

but whats in south india ?

Elephants with small ears.

 

[hello]

Lets all be clear about this
There is little doubt as to the veracity of the material in question and YES it can be used in civil cases within the Court of Arbitration for Sport as there is already a precedent for its usage in such appeal cases. (as we have not yet made as there has currently been no sanction passed down)
My question was as we haven't yet reached that stage of proceedings can the IC Adjuctary Chamber of Uefa as a regulator use such material legally to sanction. I was wondering if there was in fact a precedent for this as I wasn't aware of one.

If they are using their 2014 disciplinary regulations then yes,

Article 37
Any type of evidence may be used during disciplinary investigations and proceedings, provided that human dignity is not violated.

I am curious as to whether UEFA will use the 2014 regulations or the current regs or most likely in my view chop and change between to 2 to best justify their pre-determined favoured outcome.

 

[citytilllidie]

So, as far as I see it and to summarise;

1. UEFA investigation team under the Belgian guy have found us guilty (of something) and passed on the file to UEFA recommending a 1 year ban from UEFA Comps.

2. UEFA (the one now with the file) need to decide on a punishment, could be a 1 year ban, but this process could take up to 10 months (wow!)

3. Khaldoon confirms no case to answer if based on facts.

4. The interesting bit, Khaldoon also says if not based on facts, then a different conversation?

Now what could that mean?

 

[Canyouseethesky]

Lets all be clear about this
There is little doubt as to the veracity of the material in question and YES it can be used in civil cases within the Court of Arbitration for Sport as there is already a precedent for its usage in such appeal cases. (as we have not yet made as there has currently been no sanction passed down)
My question was as we haven't yet reached that stage of proceedings can the IC Adjuctary Chamber of Uefa as a regulator use such material legally to sanction. I was wondering if there was in fact a precedent for this as I wasn't aware of one.

My understanding of it is they don't need to use any of it, the club is not being and can't be re-tried for FFP. We are be being charged with lying essentially and they don't need emails for that. All they have done is ask questions of the club based on some media reports and decided they weren't happy with the answers.It's their competition, their rules so they can decide who gets to play and who does not.

This is were it gets messy and probably the reason the club sound so confident is there doesn't appear to be set rules as such about lying, even if they don't believe the club (which they clearly don't) then its unclear what they can actually do. I'm probably in a minority here in having sympathy for UEFA, on one side they have a club saying we done nothing wrong but on the other side they have probably 10 traditional European power houses saying they need to made an example of them to maintain the status quo. It's easy to say they should ignore them but these club's have the power to end UEFA, we could the them in knots for 20 years but we don't have the power on our own to end the organisation. As bullish as everyone on here is the part that concerns me most was the line in the review about using facts or not, you wouldn't mention not using facts unless you were worried that's what they will do.

 

[M18CTID]

So, as far as I see it and to summarise;

1. UEFA investigation team under the Belgian guy have found us guilty (of something) and passed on the file to UEFA recommending a 1 year ban from UEFA Comps.

2. UEFA (the one now with the file) need to decide on a punishment, could be a 1 year ban, but this process could take up to 10 months (wow!)

3. Khaldoon confirms no case to answer if based on facts.

4. The interesting bit, Khaldoon also says if not based on facts, then a different conversation?

Now what could that mean?

That they'll probably find us guilty - despite us providing irrefutable proof that we're innocent - is my guess

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

That they'll probably find us guilty, despite us providing irrefutable proof that we're innocent is my guess

That’s where I can see this going, we are getting fucked over what ever happens so it makes UEFA look like they are doing something about City to all those clubs in Khaldoon’s words ‘invested badly’ and are crying about it.

 

[crazyg]

You must have been a big lad if you counted for 15

January 1965, I'd have been 14 going on 15, and was quite fit. Nowadays, at 69, I'm built for comfort rather than speed, and you may have a point.

;-)

 

[abu13]

So, as far as I see it and to summarise;

1. UEFA investigation team under the Belgian guy have found us guilty (of something) and passed on the file to UEFA recommending a 1 year ban from UEFA Comps.

2. UEFA (the one now with the file) need to decide on a punishment, could be a 1 year ban, but this process could take up to 10 months (wow!)

3. Khaldoon confirms no case to answer if based on facts.

4. The interesting bit, Khaldoon also says if not based on facts, then a different conversation?

Now what could that mean?

My concern with all of this is that we will be initially banned for violating FFP, this will back up all the haters who will claim we are cheats.
It will then be overturned when we take it to CAS but it will be looked on as a "technicality" as such the accusations will remain over our heads rather than a full vindication.

The part that really infuriates is the way the goal posts were moved and the fact that Uefa have actually since changed some of the FFP rules to allow what we have done.
We should he held up as a beacon of how a modern day football club should be run.

 

[ganganvince]

That they'll probably find us guilty - despite us providing irrefutable proof that we're innocent - is my guess

Think we have already been found guilty just awaiting level of punishment.