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.
kippaxwarrior said:
Always makes me laugh when Wenger comes out and says stuff about us. He's hated us ever since the takeover but what he conveniently forgets is that if diamond dealer Danny Fiszman hadn't had pumped in over £50M of his own money into Arsenal in the mid 90's he would of never been able to sign players like Henry,Overmars,Pires(even Bergkamp was bought with that money before Wenger arrived) to help him compete with Utd.

Money HAS always talked in football
Click to expand...

But we're the only ones who spend it. Dippers got Allison, Mané, Salah, and The Greatest Dutchman ever to blah blah blah in the PL, for a bag of peanuts and a tangerine. and 'Arry Kickyerbollocks only cost a packet of Wagonwheels.
 
Okay, first timer here, be gentle. I’m a Seasoncard holder of about 30 years, and I’m seriously conflicted about all this UEFA shit. If you will allow me I will tell you why....

One the one hand, screw UEFA, corrupt to the core, protecting the elite cabal, stick it to them through the CAS and beyond that the Swiss Supreme Court if necessary. I wholeheartedly agree with all of that.

But on the other, I don’t support City so I can debate the finer points of Swiss law. For me, in the final reckoning it’s about the balti pies, the bananas, the banter with the guys who sit near me in Colin Bell, Dad taking me and now me taking Dad. The 93:20 and the cups have been amongst the best moments of my life, but they were no sweeter than Dickov 99. I suppose the truth is that I’ve never been entirely comfortable with our club being used as a billboard for Abu Dhabi. Those adverts at half time still seem incongruous to me. Maybe I’m alone in this?

So at this point you find yourself thinking, hang on a minute, are you seriously suggesting that you would go back to Lee and Jamie at the expense of Sergio and David? The answer is obviously no, at least not willingly. What we’ve seen in the last decade has often been sublime, I know that.

BUT - should we be ready to throw (cliche coming but I can’t find better words) the soul of the club away because of all this? At the end of the day, the Sheik’s involvement in our club is a short blip in a long time line. Many of you out there will go back way further than me.

Writing this out has lead me to a vague conclusion. Let’s have the properly independent appeal that the chairman wants. If it really is independent and we win, of course screw UEFA into the ground. But if we lose, we will be left with a grim choice. We either play on within rules that we know are protectionist and corrupt, or we plough our own furrow and constantly be worrying about litigation in Geneva instead of proper concerns like the state of Vinny’s knee and why (even now) it still takes 20 minutes to get a pint in the Fosters Fast Lane.

Answers on a postcard please....
 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
A poorly researched journalist?

Some are being far too kind. He has chosen to lift Prestwich Blue's information and present it as his own, ignoring the relevancy and facts to maintain his ongoing narrative.

He's not a journalist. He's a chiseler.

An absolute disgrace to the profession.
Click to expand...

A disgrace to journalism or chiselling? Maybe both
 
hello said:
tolmie, you should do a irony piece on the unicredit saga, Italian state gives italian bank billions > Italian bank extends sponsorship to UEFA competitions > UEFA rewrites FFP regulations that suddenly allow Milan club to owner invest. Reeks of corruption and not covered in the press at all, all just per coincidence and nothing to see.
Click to expand...

 
tolmie's hairdoo said:
A poorly researched journalist?

Some are being far too kind. He has chosen to lift Prestwich Blue's information and present it as his own, ignoring the relevancy and facts to maintain his ongoing narrative.

He's not a journalist. He's a chiseler.

An absolute disgrace to the profession.
Click to expand...
It is quite interesting that Conn is changing his tune and conceding that City might well not have breached FFP rules, hence his assertion that covering up and misleading those nice guys at UEFA is even worse. It actually looks as though it's Etihad's accounts rather than City's which were being protected while they battled accusations of uncompetitive state sponsorship. Which really isn't any concern of UEFA's
 
Len Rum said:
Can't agree mate.
If it's routed through J.Bloggs clearing house for financial transactions Ltd. you might have a case.
But it wasn't it came through ADUG and that is our owner and that makes all the difference.
Anyhow hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

As a qualified and very experienced accountant, I'd say you are entirely wrong: it makes no difference how it was routed (so long as it wasn't illegal) that's just a matter of substance over form. We don't know if UEFA have been idiotic enough to let such a thing confuse them as to the true source of the money and that is an issue because we currently have problem. if the routing of money is a problem it can be solved by providing appropriate evidence.

We are merely speculating though on what has happened; although it does seem to be the case that the EC have been funding Etihad's sponsorship if City and therefore, as an expedient, could quite legitimately have sent the cash via ADUG as a short-cut.

So long as Mansour was not funneling his money through Etihad to City and disguising investment as sponsorship, we have not broken FFP rules as far as I can see.

If it is Mansour's money, we have to go and fight FFP unless we can have UEFA's hacked evidence dismissed as inadmissible.
 
Cityinmyheart said:
In order for City to get an injunction against Uefa's decision. City lawyers in my view will have to establish the following:

1. Prima Facie Case: Like you stated above, City lawyers have to show that we have a good case and not a frivolous one with good chance of success when the trial begins.

2. Balance of Convenience/ Incovenience: The party that suffers the most if the injunction is not granted has more chance of getting decision in its favour.

3. Irreparable loss. That if the injunction is not granted and later we win the case, it wont compensate us for our damage to reputation and missing out on a CL campaign if later CAS give findings in our favour.

I believe all 3 of the above limbs to get an injunction do favour us. I am positive about this.
Click to expand...
Get an injunction in which court?
 
John Wayne said:
And we should remind ourselves of the uncharacteristic, bullish statements from the club in all of this - "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence". These statements are carefully crafted by solicitors. CAS has to issue a thorough determination addressing all of our arguments. If it is irrefutable, they have to side with us. If it isn't then the club needs to look at personnel change.
Click to expand...

You make a very good point. The legal profession are renowned for being cautious. The statements relating to this case are some of the most upbeat I have seen.
 
M18CTID said:
So not only is Jordan completely and utterly wrong, he's also accusing City of deciding how much UEFA should give us in prize money!
Click to expand...

He’s not the fizziest drink in the fridge is he. No wonder he went bust. I suspect even UEFA could work out how much CL TV money we receive - given it’s distributed by them !
 
MillionMilesAway said:
I might have missed earlier stuff, but why do you think UEFA withheld evidence from City?
That would automatically go badly on appeal.
Click to expand...

Ordinarily you’d be right but I suspect these fuckers know they haven’t got much of a case so they are grandstanding hoping to inflict as much damage as they can on our business and our brand in the hope CAS simply overturn it on a technicality and the stigma will stick and they can plan their next attack.
 
domalino said:
@Cityinmyheart means a suspension of the ban when he says injunction.

One representative from CAS will make a ruling over whether the ban is in place while the appeal goes forwards, or if it's lifted pending the outcome of the appeal.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure he does, as he’s applying American Cyanamid principles in his post, which suggests he’s talking about an injunction.
 
Andy Conway said:
It is Liew who uses the phrase 'subhuman scum' and he clearly does it quoting what city fans are calling UEFA and the press. Let's not get caught out misquoting people and telling lies. We're not sports churnalists.
Click to expand...
Just shows how things can be misunderstood when you only see snippets of the full articles.
So easy how things can be taken out of context, isn't it?
 
So when we are cleared of all wrong doings, where does this leave us going forward with UEFA and the gutter press. Do we try and break UEFA apart if all our evidence stacks towards us heavily in being able to do so? And will every single journo that has spouted bile and vitriol about the whole issue offer public apologies? Or do we screw them all as well?
 
blueinsa said:
Its being lost in all the hoohaa this fact.

UEFA and the PL where all over us like a rash at this point in time and our accounts and books forensically being scrutinised to ensure we fell within the rules.

They did and because they did we got part of our fine back remember.

UEFA are making such fucking idiots of themselves here over illegally obtained emails that no fucker knows are even legitimate and because certain clubs and individuals are demanding they do it yet they cant see that they have already said our financials at this period in time where fine.
Click to expand...

All that suggests that it can’t really be about the numbers in the accounts but the source of the funds. UEFA seem to think we’ve said one thing and then done something else. I just can’t see an outfit like ADUG slipping up and being naive or stupid. We were under close scrutiny so I can’t fathom what’s at the crux of this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top