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.
I've read David Conn's piece, which may well have been briefed by UEFA or at any rate rehearses the argument they'll be putting forward. It's Friday night already here in St Petersburg, Russia and, after a hard week, I'm relaxing with a few drinks with a takeaway while the missus is at the theatre. I therefore don't want to spend much time ploughing through legal stuff now (I get more of that than is good for a man in my working week anyway), but I've skim-read the CAS judgment in the AC Milan case against UEFA, which is here for anyone else who wants a look: https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Award_Final_5808.pdf

Am not in a state for rational analysis and in any case, I haven't been a front-line fee-earning lawyer for a long time (I now provide a support function to lawyers) so my analytical skills aren't maybe as sharp as they were. Nonetheless, a few points occur to me:

1. The AC Milan case involved them disputing the merits of the IC decision but not the process. City, as far as we understand, are saying that that the process was flawed and are not asking for the decision itself to be reviewed on the merits. Presumably we will then argue that it falls outside the FFP rule that doesn't allow an appeal against the IC's decision.

2. In clause 100 of the Milan judgment, it's stated that: "the applicable rules do not provide for a separate appeal against the Referral Decision and that such separate appeal [to the CAS] is also not warranted in order to protect the interests of AC Milan" (my emphasis). This implies that CAS would entertain such an appeal if they did consider it warranted in order to protect a club's interests, and no doubt MCFC will be stressing all the evidence we can gather of procedural inadequacies, bias and the like, which we claim make such an appeal necessary to protect our interests in the case at hand.

3. City, I've read in one report, are also challenging the very decision to initiate a new investigation, alleging that there was no basis for the CFCB to do so. Under clauses 1 and 2 of the FFP Rules, it's only a "final decision" of the CFCB that can be appealed, which means the decision of the AC and not the prior decision of the IC to refer it. This doesn't appear to catch a decision to initiate a case.

4. So Conn's article seems to miss points that might make MCFC's case different from that of AC Milan, by which he sets so much store. But the more telling point is that it's really a fool's errand to be trying to evaluate detailed legal arguments that we haven't even seen, and everything I write should be viewed in this context. We really should wait and see what happens.

A couple of points from Stefan from the 93:20 pod, who's a lawyer and now CEO and General Counsel (senior in-house lawyer) at a public company. He's a very switched-on guy who really should be a must follow for Blues on Twitter wanting to follow these issues and is far more worth listening to than I am. Here are two tweets of his from earlier:



I agree with him, though I think the 30% figure is one he's plucked from the air for the sake of an example. It would be bizarre for City to pursue this to CAS at the current stage if the prospects are as bleak as Conn makes out. There's no point in making such a move unless we think we've a decent chance. How great that chance is will remain impossible to assess. We won't know until the CAS judgment.

That's certainly a better view to take than putting any credence in skewed leaked material from UEFA or the idiot ramblings of out-of-their-depth fuckwit sports journalists. Indeed, most of the latter (even those who flatter themselves that they know about the business side of sport) when discussing FFP speak with all the measured authority I imagine Jack Duckworth would show if asked to dissect Immanuel Kant's critique of the ontological argument.
 
Manc in London said:
As I see it, Conn's article is suggesting that we can appeal about procedure but not before a judgement is made.
Click to expand...
David Conn is a big City fan and respected journalist, previously wrote a book about City "Richer than God" he will only tell it as it is, unlike some of the weasels that call themselves Journalist. He has written some excellent football and finance articles over the years, some about City.
 
Bluemeanster said:
David Conn is a big City fan and respected journalist, previously wrote a book about City "Richer than God" he will only tell it as it is, unlike some of the weasels that call themselves Journalist. He has written some excellent football and finance articles over the years, some about City.
Click to expand...
Hmmm
 
petrusha said:
I've read David Conn's piece, which may well have been briefed by UEFA or at any rate rehearses the argument they'll be putting forward. It's Friday night already here in St Petersburg, Russia and, after a hard week, I'm relaxing with a few drinks with a takeaway while the missus is at the theatre. I therefore don't want to spend much time ploughing through legal stuff now (I get more of that than is good for a man in my working week anyway), but I've skim-read the CAS judgment in the AC Milan case against UEFA, which is here for anyone else who wants a look: https://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Award_Final_5808.pdf

Am not in a state for rational analysis and in any case, I haven't been a front-line fee-earning lawyer for a long time (I now provide a support function to lawyers) so my analytical skills aren't maybe as sharp as they were. Nonetheless, a few points occur to me:

1. The AC Milan case involved them disputing the merits of the IC decision but not the process. City, as far as we understand, are saying that that the process was flawed and are not asking for the decision itself to be reviewed on the merits. Presumably we will then argue that it falls outside the FFP rule that doesn't allow an appeal against the IC's decision.

2. In clause 100 of the Milan judgment, it's stated that: "the applicable rules do not provide for a separate appeal against the Referral Decision and that such separate appeal [to the CAS] is also not warranted in order to protect the interests of AC Milan" (my emphasis). This implies that CAS would entertain such an appeal if they did consider it warranted in order to protect a club's interests, and no doubt MCFC will be stressing all the evidence we can gather of procedural inadequacies, bias and the like, which we claim make such an appeal necessary to protect our interests in the case at hand.

3. City, I've read in one report, are also challenging the very decision to initiate a new investigation, alleging that there was no basis for the CFCB to do so. Under clauses 1 and 2 of the FFP Rules, it's only a "final decision" of the CFCB that can be appealed, which means the decision of the AC and not the prior decision of the IC to refer it. This doesn't appear to catch a decision to initiate a case.

4. So Conn's article seems to miss points that might make MCFC's case different from that of AC Milan, by which he sets so much store. But the more telling point is that it's really a fool's errand to be trying to evaluate detailed legal arguments that we haven't even seen, and everything I write should be viewed in this context. We really should wait and see what happens.

A couple of points from Stefan from the 93:20 pod, who's a lawyer and now CEO and General Counsel (senior in-house lawyer) at a public company. He's a very switched-on guy who really should be a must follow for Blues on Twitter wanting to follow these issues and is far more worth listening to than I am. Here are two tweets of his from earlier:



I agree with him, though I think the 30% figure is one he's plucked from the air for the sake of an example. It would be bizarre for City to pursue this to CAS at the current stage if the prospects are as bleak as Conn makes out. There's no point in making such a move unless we think we've a decent chance. How great that chance is will remain impossible to assess. We won't know until the CAS judgment.

That's certainly a better view to take than putting any credence in skewed leaked material from UEFA or the idiot ramblings of out-of-their-depth fuckwit sports journalists. Indeed, most of the latter (even those who flatter themselves that they know about the business side of sport) when discussing FFP speak with all the measured authority I imagine Jack Duckworth would show if asked to dissect Immanuel Kant's critique of the ontological argument.
Click to expand...

Thanks.
Enjoy your drinks and takeaway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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.