Here's a thought on the possible outcome at CAS.
1.Due process was not followed, specifically in Uefa's failure to address City's defence adequately.
2. The sanction is set aside.
3.Uefa must go back to the AC and properly consider that defence and reach a fresh conclusion.
Matthew Syed is guest speaker at the ASCL conference this year in Birmingham on March 13th/14th.
Laughably the theme of the conference is Diversity. Yet here is another middle class white man talking to an audience of 99% middle class white men and women.
I believe Syed to be racist as well as a cheat and I’m looking forward to asking him some questions
From Wikipedia "Syed was born in Reading, Berkshire. His father, Abbas Syed, is a Pakistani immigrant to Britain who converted from Shia Islam to Christianity, and his mother is Welsh." - please check sources before you make claims of racism.
He can still be racist towards arabs which he clearly is
So because his father is from from the Indian sub peninsula, he can't be biased towards people from the middle east?
Not sure if you two realise @jamesha was responding to the assertion that Syed was a “white middle class man”.
I think it is time to end this discussion, for everyone’s sake.oh no, you’re not one of those that believe only white people can be racist, are you?In this day and age too...
If UEFA asked accountants to investigate the source of Etihad's sponsorship money, going off the leaked emails, and they found the money came from another account in Abu Dhabi then it's a matter whether the original provider of the funds was ADUG. It's possible for them to try and tie up companies and claim that it's our own money going into the Etihad sponsorship, but there might be little proof of that. We don't have access to their evidence or ours. We say we have a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence, let's hope that includes of the Etihad money.
How would it not get leaked? If you tell 20 people literally anything, they're going to tell other people.City CEO Ferran Soriano is also said to have told the players: “Trust me like I trust you, this will be dropped.”
Unless this is made up tabloid narrative, who is leaking this stuff ??
Dont for one minute think that this is a tabloid trying to make us fans feel better by writing this. This type of reporting is only to make us sound like UEFA with their leaks
Think you have probably sussed Badaz52. There is being pessimistic and there is Badaz52!He has a point. This past decade has been the greatest in the club's history. Yet you've barely posted anything praising of the team or manager. You seem to have jumped onto this issue, though. Most odd.
And we can sing we are here while we are shit.....or something like that.The more I think about it, the more I like the sound of League Two.
no VAR
no Tyler
not on MOTD
slightly less media coverage
we can chant “you’re shit ahhhh” ;)
We’ll bring back inflatable bananas, though that will probably get us banned for racism.
Interesting choice of phrase. Nobody is saying the emails are fake, simply that the deduction drawn from them is uncorroborated and incorrect.I was talking about the leaked emails that fit with the CFCB statement regarding their findings. That is the evidence I'm referring to as that is all we have to go on publicly at the moment. If they are fake then so be it.
UEFA refusing to look at evidence presented by City makes no sense. They could have at least said "thanks for that, we will have a look that after lunch". By refusing to even acknowledge it opens them up to being laughed out of court. I know they are hated on here but they can't be that thick and irresponsible. This case is going to cost them thousands of man-hours, millions of Euro and potentially multipples of that if they lose. It just can't be that simplistic.
I think that is quite likely.
With AC Milan, CAS ruled UEFA's punishment of a 2 year ban was way too much and sent it back to the Adjudicatory Chamber to go and come up with a sensible punishment. Then Milan fell out of the CL spots and accepted a ban in a deal with UEFA so they didn't have to play in the Europa.
The case will come down to what evidence UEFA has been able to compile to supplement the leaked emails. If its the leaked emails and tumbleweed (which is what City are hedging), then I reckon we will give 'em an absolute bath in CAS - after all we are in a position of power in all this, in terms of having access to 'context documents' that UEFA simply has no jurisdiction to get - even with whatever information gathering powers they have under FFP. If UEFA has done the hard yards, corroborated what is implied by the dirty emails through other evidence - then we are up a creek most likely, and deservedly so if other evidence can support their arguments to show we 'misled them' about the source of funding underlying sponsorship (not the very clearly chosen words in UEFAs statmeent - this is not about 'overvaluing' our sponsorships, but 'overstating' them - which to me suggests a focus on the source of the funds in the case of UEFA, not the absolute quantum (which was what got us the first time around)
But if UEFA has been bluffing, and the hacked emails are basically it, then if our lawyers are worth anything like what we will pay them, then we will have them over a barrel.
Its a fascinating example of John Nash 'game theory' at play. Lots of brikmanship, lots of gamesmanship, lots of strategy based on 'i think they know this, or think this, or have this'. It seems likely one party or the other will take a heavy beating if it is all played out either in CAS or later on in the courts. Hence my view is that the most likely outcome of CAS is a negotiated settlement with a much lower punishment.
As far as I can see he thinks it likely CAS will reduce the ban to one year? You can be a lot more pessimistic than that. He's entitled to his opinion even if not everyone agrees with it. Let's not get like like RAWK.Think you have probably sussed Badaz52. There is being pessimistic and there is Badaz52!
So your strangely timed prolific posting about how we may be guilty has all been based on what you assume is *some* of the evidence, presented with editorial comment by a German newspaper, not any actual understanding of the evidence UEFA used to make their decision?I was talking about the leaked emails that fit with the CFCB statement regarding their findings. That is the evidence I'm referring to as that is all we have to go on publicly at the moment. If they are fake then so be it.
There are tonnes of teams with good stadiums, youth is good and so is infrastructure. Southampton for example were in it for the long term, but they lose players every season. If you go back and look at the team they COULD have had, fuck me they would be brilliant.There is a massive flaw in that argument they put.
So you build up your stadium, infrastructure and academy to join the elite slowly? That assumes you will have a bunch of young players prepared to spend their career at a club whilst it transitions? The reality is you will just be a feeder club. Nothing to stop those already elites from tapping up the best talent and the club either being forced to sell or the player running down his contract, as the club wouldn’t be able to match wages due to FFP.
Sounds fucking great if they assume we are all stupid.
Suspect it will be funded by CFG, so as not to affect our ffp. That would be a company defending a wholly owned subsid.as this is going to cost City ££ doest the money come from City ie could effect ffp or can Mansour funded it out of his own pocket ? Or when we win UEFA pay for our costs ?
IIRC CAS overturned that decision completely aslong as they could balance their books by 2021, but then Milan breached FFP rules again and that's when they agreed to the one year ban.
His opinion is not necessarily what makes him suspect — we mods aren’t from RAWK.As far as I can see he thinks it likely CAS will reduce the ban to one year? You can be a lot more pessimistic than that. He's entitled to his opinion even if not everyone agrees with it. Let's not get like like RAWK.