If you go through this thread someone has spelled it out why its not against the rules just because uefa hasn't thought of it and city found a way of might I say found the way to do what they did and uefa think fcuk why didnt we think of stopping that loop hole.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
UEFA FFP investigation - CAS decision to be announced Monday, 13th July 9.30am BST
- Thread starter razman
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
If you go through this thread someone has spelled it out why its not against the rules just because uefa hasn't thought of it and city found a way of might I say found the way to do what they did and uefa think fcuk why didnt we think of stopping that loop hole.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
If you go through this thread someone has spelled it out why its not against the rules just because uefa hasn't thought of it and city found a way of might I say found the way to do what they did and uefa think fcuk why didnt we think of stopping that loop hole.
That's pretty much as I see it - it probably did happen, but may not be against the rules.
I don't know what the specifics of the rules are. Some opinions here are doubtlessly better grounded than mine though.
JRockBlues
Well-Known Member
The only issue I have with the club taking this approach of going to CAS now is that if they agree with us and instruct the AC to throw the case out then can't you just see the media narrative straight after? I can see the headlines now:
"City case thrown out on technicality due to UEFA bungling."
Certainly won't be:
"City exhonerated as CAS agrees no case to answer."
"City case thrown out on technicality due to UEFA bungling."
Certainly won't be:
"City exhonerated as CAS agrees no case to answer."
Indaparkside
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2015
- Messages
- 14,772
The only issue I have with the club taking this approach of going to CAS now is that if they agree with us and instruct the AC to throw the case out then can't you just see the media narrative straight after? I can see the headlines now:
"City case thrown out on technicality due to UEFA bungling."
Certainly won't be:
"City exhonerated as CAS agrees no case to answer."
Or city banned for 10 years,as they’ve not stuck to their asbo with being noisy neighbours
Gremlin
Well-Known Member
The only issue I have with the club taking this approach of going to CAS now is that if they agree with us and instruct the AC to throw the case out then can't you just see the media narrative straight after? I can see the headlines now:
"City case thrown out on technicality due to UEFA bungling."
Certainly won't be:
"City exhonerated as CAS agrees no case to answer."
Well, to be fair, City don't appear to be arguing about FFP, they are arguing that UEFA haven't followed their own procedures (and it is this that CAS are qualified to adjudicate on, they probably don't have the remit to look at FFP as a whole). Hence, whilst if CAS throw it out it may be viewed as a 'technicality', the technicality in question is that it was a kangaroo court set up to find City guilty without due process.
FrankSwift1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 899
The only issue I have with the club taking this approach of going to CAS now is that if they agree with us and instruct the AC to throw the case out then can't you just see the media narrative straight after? I can see the headlines now:
"City case thrown out on technicality due to UEFA bungling."
Certainly won't be:
"City exhonerated as CAS agrees no case to answer."
But this has got to be better than being found guilty then apealing to CAS. Every single article about City would contain a mention of our guilt for up to year whilst the appeal is heard. This way the process is cutbshort and hopefully we are never found guilty.
"The appeal filed at the CAS on 3 October 2018 by Paris Saint-Germain against the decision issued on 19 September 2018 by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA (to reopen the case) is upheld and the challenged decision is set aside," CAS said in a statement.@Parisian can you remember how long CAS took with your case?
https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Media_Release_5937_decision.pdf
Appeal filed on 3 October 2018 and decision of CAS given on 19 March 2019.
Centurions
Well-Known Member
But the point is we won't be cleared in most minds, it'll be similar to the 'Not Proven' nonsense in Scotland which usually is taken as 'we know you're guilty but we just can't actually prove it'. Presuming CAS throws UEFA out, it'll be interesting to see if City start looking for damages to our reputation.But this has got to be better than being found guilty then apealing to CAS. Every single article about City would contain a mention of our guilt for up to year whilst the appeal is heard. This way the process is cutbshort and hopefully we are never found guilty.
Fred_Quimby
Well-Known Member
"The appeal filed at the CAS on 3 October 2018 by Paris Saint-Germain against the decision issued on 19 September 2018 by the Adjudicatory Chamber of the UEFA (to reopen the case) is upheld and the challenged decision is set aside," CAS said in a statement.
https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/CAS_Media_Release_5937_decision.pdf
Appeal filed on 3 October 2018 and decision of CAS given on 19 March 2019.
Bloody hell. In for a long wait then. Be some Christmas present.
PannickAtTheDisco
Well-Known Member
Bloody hell. In for a long wait then. Be some Christmas present.
"So little Johnny, what did you get in your Christmas card?"
"£50 amazon voucher".
"Oh, how lovely! Ferran, what about you?"
"nada, just our CAS appeal verdict"
- Status
- Not open for further replies.