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

[Newman Noggs]

I think the assumption that they are doing the investigation themselves is a misrepresentation.

There will be a whole bunch of staff who collect figures and examples for each feature and then lay the details out for assessment - "here are corresponding valuations for club A, B and C".

There's every chance that someone on the staff is the source of the leaks not the 8 committee members - far less to lose if uncovered than one of the IC 8-man committee.

We're guessing, of course, but I'd say its most likely to be someone outside of the committee but senior enough to be privy to the investigation.

Either way, it's immaterial to the fact that there has been a leak and its the regulatory body's responsibility to ensure that confidentiality is maintained.

City will be absolutely hammering this point and UEFA will be running round trying to cover its arse. As I said on the day, it's a major, major dropped bollock thanks to someone who got giddy and just couldn't wait to tarnish our treble.

 

[KS55]

That's correct. I'm not privy to the actual agreement but I'd have thought that the agreed sanction in relation to the breach of FFP and the resultant fine brought an end to the original proceedings.

Hence why the reported allegations relate to misleading the investigators not a breach of FFP.

Yes, original case ended. But Uefa regs allow them to re-open if new info comes to light, provided less than 5 years has passed. Do we know what the likely charge is? Has this been officially stated? I am aware of quotes like " if they have been deceiving us", but have the adjudication chamber said what the charge is? Has the investigatory chamber recommended a charge? Leaks, counter leaks, fried leaks.

 

[KS55]

UEFA latest.
" We think City have been a bit naughty, but we can't really prove it. Also, they are about to give us a load of grief at CAS, and in the press. We have decided to give them a slap and tell them not to do it again. Case closed, with apologies to Liverpool, Manyoo, Bayern, the Spanish FA, and anyone else with a vested interest.".
Rick Parry is....?garbled comms.

 

[Bluemeanster]

Im shocked that David Gill isn't on that list...

David Gill is the UEFA Vice President and Treasurer

 

[Fordyboy46]

David Gill is the UEFA Vice President and Treasurer

Gill is the mastermind behind it all I'd guess. Had it in for City ever since the takeover, the guys a massive bellend.

 

[cheekybids]

Gill is the mastermind behind it all I'd guess. Had it in for City ever since the takeover, the guys a massive bellend.

His face was a picture at the fa cup final as the 6th went in.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Yes, original case ended. But Uefa regs allow them to re-open if new info comes to light, provided less than 5 years has passed. Do we know what the likely charge is? Has this been officially stated? I am aware of quotes like " if they have been deceiving us", but have the adjudication chamber said what the charge is? Has the investigatory chamber recommended a charge? Leaks, counter leaks, fried leaks.

I'd love to know the answers. We are speculating but, I would suggest, with as much, if not more, knowledge of the subject than most of those opining in the media.

I was looking into whether proceedings at the CAS are public and, according to their rules, they don't appear to be. However, there's a drugs case involving Mutu, the footballer and Pechstein, a skater, which, despite rejecting their claims made a ruling about the right to a public hearing under Article 6 of the ECHR suggesting that CAS should have acceded to Pechstein's request for one.

The decision is more nuanced than that and, anyway, it may be that neither side would want the dirty laundry being aired in public. I bloody would though.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

We're guessing, of course, but I'd say its most likely to be someone outside of the committee but senior enough to be privy to the investigation.

Either way, it's immaterial to the fact that there has been a leak and its the regulatory body's responsibility to ensure that confidentiality is maintained.

City will be absolutely hammering this point and UEFA will be running round trying to cover its arse. As I said on the day, it's a major, major dropped bollock thanks to someone who got giddy and just couldn't wait to tarnish our treble.

Yes, yes, yes and not so sure about that!

 

[KS55]

The decision is more nuanced than that and, anyway, it may be that neither side would want the dirty laundry being aired in public. I bloody would though.

Me too. When its all over, City should publish their dossier.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Incidentally, as far as we can see, one of our contentions appears to be that the investigation was hurried and incomplete to meet the 5 year deadline and therefore unfair and abuse of process.

If that's the case, we need to be squeaky clean in terms of compliance with requests for information. Any contributory delay in the process occasioned by non-co-operation, for example, on our part would mitigate against our argument.

Yeah, I thought that too, which made me wonder did we drop the 100 page document on them right at the death with the intention of causing this exact issue.