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

[u2fme2]

Aggro !!

so no leaks on are part then !!

 

[manimanc]

Martin Lipton , never had a good word to say about us, in all the time I've read and heard his bitter comments not once has he praised us, he's always picked holes with us, a complete bellend of a fella.

 

[Newman Noggs]

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.

I'd regard it as remiss of our legal team if they didn't push the delay but within reasonable perameters having one eye on the "contributory delay" argument.

We also don't know the content of the 100 page dossier, whether it was evidence pertaining to the allegations or complaints about the process ? Whatever, I'm sure it's in front of the CAS.

 

[pavelsrnicek]

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.

Do we know when we were notified about the investigation? It appears to have been around the 7th of March this year. That means 68 days until the referred the matter from the CFCB to the adjudicatory chamber.

We don’t know how quickly we responded, did UEFA ask for a response within a specific time period, did we meet that? Then what was UEFA’s response. Did they look for clarification or further information? Unfortunately we won’t know what happened between those dates but given the time periods it’s not hard to see that it could easily be rushed.

What I don’t understand is that UEFA seem to say at Article 38 of their procedural rules the CFCB can extend the time. Did they do this? If not why not?

Lots of questions but I doubt we’ll get to see the answers.

 

[Damanino]

This whole case is a mess.

Dont even understand it. Whats the basic problem? Whats the naughty stuff of the spiegel docs that brought all this down on us?

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

Do we know when we were notified about the investigation? It appears to have been around the 7th of March this year. That means 68 days until the referred the matter from the CFCB to the adjudicatory chamber.

We don’t know how quickly we responded, did UEFA ask for a response within a specific time period, did we meet that? Then what was UEFA’s response. Did they look for clarification or further information? Unfortunately we won’t know what happened between those dates but given the time periods it’s not hard to see that it could easily be rushed.

What I don’t understand is that UEFA seem to say at Article 38 of their procedural rules the CFCB can extend the time. Did they do this? If not why not?

Lots of questions but I doubt we’ll get to see the answers.

This doesn't answer your questions but according to tolmie earlier in the thread:

"We met with them and heard nothing back for three weeks, despite assurances.
The next day, Uefa had kicked it up to their upper chamber
This is a very clever move by City on a number of fronts"

https://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/...y-have-appealed.339272/page-631#post-11843415

 

[@BluePhil8]

If 3 weeks isn't long enough to review and make a preliminary summary on a 100 page document then that is not City's problem. I used to read more than 100 pages of Harry Potter on a Saturday when I was about 11 years old.

 

[Newman Noggs]

Do we know when we were notified about the investigation? It appears to have been around the 7th of March this year. That means 68 days until the referred the matter from the CFCB to the adjudicatory chamber.

We don’t know how quickly we responded, did UEFA ask for a response within a specific time period, did we meet that? Then what was UEFA’s response. Did they look for clarification or further information? Unfortunately we won’t know what happened between those dates but given the time periods it’s not hard to see that it could easily be rushed.

What I don’t understand is that UEFA seem to say at Article 38 of their procedural rules the CFCB can extend the time. Did they do this? If not why not?

Lots of questions but I doubt we’ll get to see the answers.

My interpretation is that Article 38 applies to time limits specified in the Rules such as those between notifying the subject of the decision and the publication of that decision. That would be in response to a request from the defendant for example, pending legal applications to the CAS. It looks as if it's discretionary.

Article 37 is unequivocal and it's in there to comply with the ECHR right to a fair trial.

Everything we have, except for the existence of an investigation and our appeal is conjecture at the moment. Conjecture, I might add, being fanned by strategic press briefings and a prejudiced and ignorant media.

As City fans, we shouldn't get too giddy or too depressed, there are too many unknowns.

I'm just happy that it looks as though we're taking the initiative to shut this down one way or another.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Do we know when we were notified about the investigation? It appears to have been around the 7th of March this year. That means 68 days until the referred the matter from the CFCB to the adjudicatory chamber.

We don’t know how quickly we responded, did UEFA ask for a response within a specific time period, did we meet that? Then what was UEFA’s response. Did they look for clarification or further information? Unfortunately we won’t know what happened between those dates but given the time periods it’s not hard to see that it could easily be rushed.

What I don’t understand is that UEFA seem to say at Article 38 of their procedural rules the CFCB can extend the time. Did they do this? If not why not?

Lots of questions but I doubt we’ll get to see the answers.

I think your last point is the key one - we don't know.
I think the CAS judgement will be public though, and will help clear things up.

 

[lazerblue]

David Gill is the UEFA Vice President and Treasurer

treasurer eh, theres always skeletons in a treasurers cupboard if you look hard enough

 

[Fred_Quimby]

This whole case is a mess.

Dont even understand it. Whats the basic problem? Whats the naughty stuff of the spiegel docs that brought all this down on us?

I am lay man in this also so forgive me if I have it wrong.

It would appear that we are not being ‘done’ under FFP but for giving ‘incorrect’ or ‘misleading’ information on our previous misdemeanour ie not saying where are money really came from. However, it appears that UEFA have not carried out due process and we are going to CAS because of this. The actual ‘offence’ has not been completed yet and will not be until CAS has adjudicated. City have also sent a 100 page rebuttal of all charges.

Clear?? :)

 

[FrankSwift1]

Does any one have an idea of a timeframe for when CAS will release their judgement? Also would you think that the PSG judgement last year(?) could give us an idea as both cases seem to be based on challenging UEFA on the competency/legality of their procedure?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I am lay man in this also so forgive me if I have it wrong.

It would appear that we are not being ‘done’ under FFP but for giving ‘incorrect’ or ‘misleading’ information on our previous misdemeanour ie not saying where are money really came from. However, it appears that UEFA have not carried out due process and we are going to CAS because of this. The actual ‘offence’ has not been completed yet and will not be until CAS has adjudicated. City have also sent a 100 page rebuttal of all charges.

Clear?? :)

That's right.

Owners are only allowed to invest a certain amount a year.

The Spiegel publications indicate that there may have been more than that from the owner being invested by routing it through third parties, and that City have been using shenanigans to cover it up (essentially, imagine that a sponsor could only afford 5M a year, but if someone [such as our owner] gives them 5M, they can sponsor City for 10M).

Whether it is either true, against the rules or true and provable is unclear.

 

[jrb]

Has anyone got the contact number of Tebas?

Real Madrid are about to sign Hazard for well in excess of £100mill, and I’d like to ask Tebas what he thinks of that. And what he thinks of Real Madrid once again inflating the transfer market, and inflating player wages.(along with United)

 

[Rolee]

Has anyone got the contact number of Tebas?

Real Madrid are about to sign Hazard for well in excess of £100mill, and I’d like to ask Tebas what he thinks of that. And what he thinks of Real Madrid once again inflating the transfer market, and inflating player wages.(along with United)

He will tell you that Real have to pay this kind of money because City have distorted the market.

 

[mat]

Another blue exposing the PR men posing as serious journalists.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Another blue exposing the PR men posing as serious journalists.

This is what we as a fanbase and a club need to adopt now. I defend my club to the hilt on other platforms as I am sure many fellow Blues do - I think its time we took it too the stands as in the form of specificly aimed flags on match days

 

[waspish]

That's right.

Owners are only allowed to invest a certain amount a year.

The Spiegel publications indicate that there may have been more than that from the owner being invested by routing it through third parties, and that City have been using shenanigans to cover it up (essentially, imagine that a sponsor could only afford 5M a year, but if someone [such as our owner] gives them 5M, they can sponsor City for 10M).

Whether it is either true, against the rules or true and provable is unclear.

Not against the rules.

 

[SWP's back]

Does any one have an idea of a timeframe for when CAS will release their judgement? Also would you think that the PSG judgement last year(?) could give us an idea as both cases seem to be based on challenging UEFA on the competency/legality of their procedure?

@Parisian can you remember how long CAS took with your case?

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

What I would really like to know is how much can (For example) Real Madrid spend compared with City? If FFP allows Real Madrid to spend £100m more than everyone else then that needs highlighting, that would win the hearts and minds of the general footballing public when it comes to FFP. But how much are the "Favoured" clubs allowed to spend compared to everyone else.

The rules are (As I understand it) that clubs can spend 5m EUR more than they earn, with debts allowed up to 45m EUR - Per assessment period. But how much does that give lets says United to spend more than everyone else? Unfairness needs exposing but no one seems to want to do that.