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.
For some reason this ****'s tweets on the Panja story aren't showing on my own account (maybe the twat blocked me) but if anyone can put the stupid twat right and tell him that the e-mails prove fuck all and are just evidence of a conversation that has been twisted by Der Spiegel to suit their own agenda it would be much appreciated:

 
M18CTID said:
For some reason this ****'s tweets on the Panja story aren't showing on my own account (maybe the twat blocked me) but if anyone can put the stupid twat right and tell him that the e-mails prove fuck all and are just evidence of a conversation that has been twisted by Der Spiegel to suit their own agenda it would be much appreciated:

Click to expand...

Why bother replying to a dick that thinks a refusal to comment is an admission of guilt?
 
M18CTID said:
For some reason this ****'s tweets on the Panja story aren't showing on my own account (maybe the twat blocked me) but if anyone can put the stupid twat right and tell him that the e-mails prove fuck all and are just evidence of a conversation that has been twisted by Der Spiegel to suit their own agenda it would be much appreciated:

Click to expand...


I've asked what rule breaches were detailed, awaiting his response.
 
M18CTID said:
Makes you wonder doesn't it? To be fair, on this occasion Sam Lee seems to have broken the story first but put a much longer timeline on when an announcement would be made

I know Tariq Panja has come in for a lot of stick from our fans but all I've really seen from him is him breaking stories that have been leaked to him which is what any journalist would do. Unless I'm mistaken, I've not seen him go down the route of Castles/McKenna/Delaney/Harris x 2/Syed, etc, and announce to the world that the club is guilty
Click to expand...

Not as bad as the others but he clearly dislikes us. Rabin has a post that picks out some belters from his timeline on twitter.
 
M18CTID said:
For some reason this ****'s tweets on the Panja story aren't showing on my own account (maybe the twat blocked me) but if anyone can put the stupid twat right and tell him that the e-mails prove fuck all and are just evidence of a conversation that has been twisted by Der Spiegel to suit their own agenda it would be much appreciated:

Click to expand...

‘Ergo’. Sad cünt.
 
Hopefully this is the final twist in the story of City and FFP which ends with a declaration of City's complete innocence. It seems, then, a baffling saga with the only consistent theme of a desire to damage the reputation and standing of the club and debase its achievements. We have never been short of ideas on who the leading actors are in this conspiracy and now would be a good time for the authorities to put them out to pasture, if nothing worse.

I think it fair to say that major institutions see litigation as the desperate last option to resolve a problem or dispute. This appears to have been UEFA's position in 2014 and certainly Infantino stated last December that this had been his position. City went so far as to take a "pinch" so that the club could not become embroiled in a case but could move on. It seems, however, that UEFA is actually split: a group of doves glad to see the back in 2014 to a potentially very damaging case but also a group of hawks who saw the DS "leaks" as a golden opportunity to end City's participation in the CL, with all the "collateral damage" that would bring with it, and keep the media full of negative stories about the club ( to add to the already extensive reporting ). Who could these "hawks" possibly be?! They appear to have been in a majority in the investigative chamber but too clever for themselves in the end. I presume that the reference of the case to CAS at least focused attention and involved what our American cousins call "plea bargaining" - discussions between the parties, City and UEFA and possibly even CAS. The club seems, not surprisingly, to have handled this very well and its intransigence coupled with the nature of the evidence the investigative chamber used so willingly have left UEFA with nothing more than face saving gestures.

What this shows, though, is that the hawks may have suffered a defeat but they are still there and that they still have the backing of medias all too willing to do any damage to City they can. We can only hope that it may be a case of computer hacking which ruins the anti City campaign rather than our CL ambitions.
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
We won't be accepting any fine.

As far as we are concerned, we can keep it in litigation for an eternity.

And certainly not to spare Uefa bankruptcy.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began.

All the way to CAS.
Click to expand...


I don't think the "keep it in litigation forever" line works at this point either as a strategy or as a public comment. It's not clearing our name, and it makes people think we're guilty but just throwing our financial weight around in the courts to escape judgement.

We need the case to be closed and the ruling in our favour if we are in the right.

That's the beginning of the push back against the narrative that we flagrantly break rules. Then you have proof that a legitimate court says you're innocent and UEFA are running a kangaroo court.
 
Last edited:
Centurions said:
Why bother replying to a dick that thinks a refusal to comment is an admission of guilt?
Click to expand...
I replied to one, who was saying that Der Spiegel published these documents & City didn't deny they were genuine therefore we must be guilty. My reply was that it was all about context and that the DS were very selective about what they did publish &, for example, didn't include anything on the UEFA rule change that screwed us over. (Incidentally I've recently found out that we went to UEFA 3 times with our 2012 accounts to check we'd meet the Annex XI requirement and 3 times UEFA said that we would). Without understanding that, everything we did in the 2013 financial year looks much more shifty than it was.

My analogy was imagine you're having some banter with your mates via text or WhatsApp. They put up a photo of you that's less than flattering and you reply "You bastards. I'll kill you" or words to that effect. Or they're taunting you because they're going on a holiday you weren't able to go on & you send a message saying "I'm going to put a bomb on the plane". Someone who hadn't seen the rest of the exchange sees you send that message & reports it to the police. On the basis of that, you get arrested but when you explain the background & show them the rest of the messages they realise it was a joke between mates & let you go. Context is crucial.

Just to finally make the point, I was at a Football Writers Festival event in September where David Conn & a sports lawyer called Daniel Geey, who's a Liverpool fan, were talking about football finances. This particular subject came up of course and even David said that there was nothing in the Der Spiegel articles that was remotely like a smoking gun and that it was all a bit 'meh'. Daniel fully agreed with him.
 
Last edited:
tolmie's hairdoo said:
We won't be accepting any fine.

As far as we are concerned, we can keep it in litigation for an eternity.

And certainly not to spare Uefa bankruptcy.

City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began.

All the way to CAS.
Click to expand...
City have recorded everything that has been reported since this 'investigation' began - you mean they know who said what, where and when? In which case we may be due a windfall of cash when we sue all the fuckers!
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I replied to one, who was saying that Der Spiegel published these documents & City didn't deny they were genuine therefore we must be guilty. My reply was that it was all about context and that the DS were very selective about what they did publish &, for example, didn't include anything on the UEFA rule change that screwed us over. (Incidentally I've recently found out that we went to UEFA 3 times with our 2012 accounts to check we'd meet the Annex XI requirement and 3 times UEFA said that we would). Without understanding that, everything we did in the 2013 financial year looks much more shifty than it was.

My analogy was imagine you're having some banter with your mates via text or WhatsApp. They put up a photo of you that's less than flattering and you reply "You bastards. I'll kill you" or words to that effect. Or they're taunting you because they're going on a holiday you weren't able to go on & you send a message saying "I'm going to put a bomb on the plane". Someone who hadn't seen the rest of the exchange sees you send that message & reports it to the police. On the basis of that, you get arrested but when you explain the background & show them the rest of the messages they realise it was a joke between mates & let you go.

Just to finally make the point, I was at a Football Writers Festival event in September where David Conn & a sports lawyer called Daniel Geey, who's a Liverpool fan were talking about football finances. This particular subject came up of course and even David said that there was nothing in the Der Spiegel articles that was remotely like a smoking gun and that it was all a bit 'meh'. Daniel fully agreed with him.
Click to expand...
Did you give David Conn a smack?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top