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

[Kazzydeyna]

That is an interesting argument. Do you think the panel, like Leterme etc would risk their reputation though and if UEFA have little grounds to punish us, and their arguments are baseless, would that also not make UEFA look corrupt. As you say it may depend on what is considered the lesser of the two evils.

I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I believe uefa went ahead with a case that they may well have known was shaky and knowing we would appeal and have gambled on imposing a draconian sentence, perhaps believing the ban would be reduced at appeal. This is then a win win for them. "We did city, they appealed, they still got a ban" etc.

It's an advanced version of the original case. "We did city, clipped their wings, kept them in their place" what they didnt bank on originally was the explosive growth in our business on and particularly off the field.

I think they've gambled believing the odds of SOME form of punishment remaining after an appeal made it a justifiable gamble. Let's be real here, if we are not completely exonerated (which is by no means guaranteed) uefa have won. The narrative is set for all time, namely "City are cheats. We proved it"

That is why I believe City refused any deal that may have been offered, unlike the first time around. We have gone all in in this. It really is win or bust.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Do you think, if City did win, there would be a case for defamation?

Against UEFA? Doubt it. More likely against certain newspapers and journalists but it's a path I doubt we'd take unless it was something particularly nasty.

 

[Coatigan]

I have really enjoyed reading this thread lately, and credit to the posters offering a little bit of balance. Ultimately that's what will decide this, on balance, one will have a slightly more convincing arguement.

I see it mentioned a fair bit that both sides have so much to lose, i'm not sure i agree with that.

We certainly have so so much to lose. Uefa however, not that much at all. If we win, and by that i mean total clearance (as partial reductions of the ban are no win) this wont be the first or last case made by uefa that gets overturned. It is routine proceedings within a mechanism that exists to do just that. It will set no precedent that hasnt already partially been set, no positions will be lost, nor any meaningful reputation.

FFP itself is not being challenged, nor is uefa, just the process and interpretation of evidence supplied by us, within a timeframe they had to work to, by a separate (i dont want to use the word independent) body within uefa. So they have all the outs they could wish for. Time was too short, the evidence was unclear, basic diffence of interpretation. etc etc etc. We certainly have a lot more to lose.

I agree that this isnt as trivial and as obviously baseless as we'd like to think. For experienced professionals, irrespective of where their motivation might lie, to issue such a verdict and punishment, they must think they have some grounds. No way would they be doing that on rivals' perv
perceived peer pressure, biased media rumourmongering (and both do certainly exist), without Some substance they think they can cling to. We could be 100% right in our eyes (as a club rather than fan commentators), still needs demonstrated in terms suitable to this process. So while i absolutely love the confidence, and buy into it with plenty of hope, i take nothing for granted and recognize it is no givem we will just breeze through clearing this.

 

[shevtheblue]

Against UEFA? Doubt it. More likely against certain newspapers and journalists but it's a path I doubt we'd take unless it was something particularly nasty.

It did seem we went out of our way to talk about how UEFA's procedure was unfair, and how they specifically leaked things to the press. Sounds like some kind of liable to me, but we do have a history of just trying to work it out (which might be the best thing to do).

 

[nmc]

I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I believe uefa went ahead with a case that they may well have known was shaky and knowing we would appeal and have gambled on imposing a draconian sentence, perhaps believing the ban would be reduced at appeal. This is then a win win for them. "We did city, they appealed, they still got a ban" etc.

It's an advanced version of the original case. "We did city, clipped their wings, kept them in their place" what they didnt bank on originally was the explosive growth in our business on and particularly off the field.

I think they've gambled believing the odds of SOME form of punishment remaining after an appeal made it a justifiable gamble. Let's be real here, if we are not completely exonerated (which is by no means guaranteed) uefa have won. The narrative is set for all time, namely "City are cheats. We proved it"

That is why I believe City refused any deal that may have been offered, unlike the first time around. We have gone all in in this. It really is win or bust.

There are two questions for CAS to address at the hearing the first being - are we guilty of breaching FFP rules - where we are accused of “inflating” sponsorship deals. This will be a straight forward - yes you did and their is sufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support that claim Or no you didn’t and their is insufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support such a claim. Here we either get off Scott free or we get a punishment - there is no splitting the difference. This point may be complicated by City’s claim that the process used was unfair - But I won’t address that here safe to say that CAS have already indicated that the process used may have flaws.

The second question for CAS - which only arises if question 1 finds us guilty - is does the punishment fit the crime based upon comparison with similar cases - on that point the punishment does look disproportionate so thoughts about a 1 year ban probably do come into play BUT only at this point.

 

[KS55]

Reading this thread, I am struck by the fact that Bluemooners have got much closer to the truth than the national press. Ok, we are naturally biassed and some of our posts are wide of the mark but, generally speaking, we present a strong analytical case.
@Prestwich_Blue has a much better grasp of the technicalities than any of the scribblers. @nmc produced a marvellous analysis of the psychological dimension to this case. There are many other decent contributions and this is without access to facts which the press could obtain but are reluctant to do so.
Nobody reading the press would get the impression that there is a huge battle going on between the G14, who have largely captured UEFA, and elements within the organization who want a fairer more balanced approach. The European Clubs association is silent -- the cartel is in the process of capturing them, too. What you might call the second rank of European clubs are being damaged and there seems to be no-one standing up for them.
As an example, take UEFA's boasting about the success of FFP. It has actually damaged European football. Oh, say Uefa, look how the losses have reduced. That may be so, but at an enormous cost. No paper has pointed out that balance sheets are a mess: large borrowings and debt mean clubs are to no position to handle the financial effects of coronavirus. As for competitiveness, look at leagues all over Europe: from the largest to the smallest mostly they are dominated by just one club. France, Italy, Germany know who the champions will be before a ball is kicked. In the smaller leagues the situation is even worse. No paper has done any analysis. Only England is an exception due, of course, to the filthy oil money of Chelsea and City. Bluemoon has discussed this, where is the contribution of the Times or Guardian? No, they prefer to major on City's 'sins' and get the clicks.
So, Bluemooners try to make sense of all this, while the national media scribblers go to the pub, and they call us paranoid.
When UEFA implodes and the G14 run football for their own benefit with a closed shop competition, everyone will ask what happened. The answer is that the press will have let us all down in favour of clickbait.
Keep at it blues, we will win in the end.

 

[Proy]

Very good point George. UEFA stands in the way of the Cartel getting their European Super League. They'd be equally happy to see us take UEFA down as to see UEFA take us down. So they see it as a win-win but some of them are going to end up as the casualties here.

This angle intrigues me.

Obviously aware that the cartel clubs are involved deeply in the dark arts, but I'd like to know how they will end up as casualties.

 

[cheekybids]

I have really enjoyed reading this thread lately, and credit to the posters offering a little bit of balance. Ultimately that's what will decide this, on balance, one will have a slightly more convincing arguement.

I see it mentioned a fair bit that both sides have so much to lose, i'm not sure i agree with that.

We certainly have so so much to lose. Uefa however, not that much at all. If we win, and by that i mean total clearance (as partial reductions of the ban are no win) this wont be the first or last case made by uefa that gets overturned. It is routine proceedings within a mechanism that exists to do just that. It will set no precedent that hasnt already partially been set, no positions will be lost, nor any meaningful reputation.

FFP itself is not being challenged, nor is uefa, just the process and interpretation of evidence supplied by us, within a timeframe they had to work to, by a separate (i dont want to use the word independent) body within uefa. So they have all the outs they could wish for. Time was too short, the evidence was unclear, basic diffence of interpretation. etc etc etc. We certainly have a lot more to lose.

I agree that this isnt as trivial and as obviously baseless as we'd like to think. For experienced professionals, irrespective of where their motivation might lie, to issue such a verdict and punishment, they must think they have some grounds. No way would they be doing that on rivals' perv
perceived peer pressure, biased media rumourmongering (and both do certainly exist), without Some substance they think they can cling to. We could be 100% right in our eyes (as a club rather than fan commentators), still needs demonstrated in terms suitable to this process. So while i absolutely love the confidence, and buy into it with plenty of hope, i take nothing for granted and recognize it is no givem we will just breeze through clearing this.

Really good points raised & the issue that interests me if City are cleared is who takes responsibility for this charade.

If no one & it stops as soon as City are cleared then you’ll see why it’s occurred & it happens the world over. There has to be retribution & it has to individuals as well as the the Corp they represent I.e if it’s Gill & Parry then they & the Rags & Dippers benefitted need punishing.

Netflix has a good series called dirty money, very interesting & don’t expect big industries to play by the rules.

 

[Silva2021]

An interesting side story to this is Newcastle, there is an argument on City getting in before the draw bridge was closed and we are and have become one of the strongest teams within. This case will cement that or weaken us for a period, but regardless we are in for the long term.

Newcastle are not in, yet will have the financial strength to scare the G14.

The last thing they want at this point is City going after FFP and dare I say it City board (as a fan I don’t agree with it) would also want FFP.

Whether in this cloaks and daggers world this will have any effect, but I do think G14/ UEFA will have one eye on Newcastle at this time as well...

 

[Kenward Garg]

I have really enjoyed reading this thread lately, and credit to the posters offering a little bit of balance. Ultimately that's what will decide this, on balance, one will have a slightly more convincing arguement.

I see it mentioned a fair bit that both sides have so much to lose, i'm not sure i agree with that.

We certainly have so so much to lose. Uefa however, not that much at all. If we win, and by that i mean total clearance (as partial reductions of the ban are no win) this wont be the first or last case made by uefa that gets overturned. It is routine proceedings within a mechanism that exists to do just that. It will set no precedent that hasnt already partially been set, no positions will be lost, nor any meaningful reputation.

FFP itself is not being challenged, nor is uefa, just the process and interpretation of evidence supplied by us, within a timeframe they had to work to, by a separate (i dont want to use the word independent) body within uefa. So they have all the outs they could wish for. Time was too short, the evidence was unclear, basic diffence of interpretation. etc etc etc. We certainly have a lot more to lose.

I agree that this isnt as trivial and as obviously baseless as we'd like to think. For experienced professionals, irrespective of where their motivation might lie, to issue such a verdict and punishment, they must think they have some grounds. No way would they be doing that on rivals' perv
perceived peer pressure, biased media rumourmongering (and both do certainly exist), without Some substance they think they can cling to. We could be 100% right in our eyes (as a club rather than fan commentators), still needs demonstrated in terms suitable to this process. So while i absolutely love the confidence, and buy into it with plenty of hope, i take nothing for granted and recognize it is no givem we will just breeze through clearing this.

I’ve a feeling you’ll be proved right. This whole process stinks but hasn’t it always been that way?

 

[petrusha]

There are two questions for CAS to address at the hearing the first being - are we guilty of breaching FFP rules - where we are accused of “inflating” sponsorship deals. This will be a straight forward - yes you did and their is sufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support that claim Or no you didn’t and their is insufficient evidence on the balance of probabilities to support such a claim. Here we either get off Scott free or we get a punishment - there is no splitting the difference. This point may be complicated by City’s claim that the process used was unfair - But I won’t address that here safe to say that CAS have already indicated that the process used may have flaws.

The second question for CAS - which only arises if question 1 finds us guilty - is does the punishment fit the crime based upon comparison with similar cases - on that point the punishment does look disproportionate so thoughts about a 1 year ban probably do come into play BUT only at this point.

No. There are issues to be resolved before we get to those.

Firstly, City went to the CAS seeking to have the IC's referral of our case set aside because their procedural breaches made it impossible for the entire process to be prosecuted fairly in the AC. Now, the CAS declined to exercise its power to reverse the IC's ruling on this point at that stage but conceded that it could be a valid argument and that we'd be entitled to put it forward at the current stage, even expressing some sympathy with us on the merits. I assume it's therefore a line of argument that we'll run with again. I'm not sure I'd be confident that it'll be decisive because the AC will have presumably bent over backwards to ensure that any failings on the IC's part can't constitute grounds for the entire process to be binned. However, even if we won't win, this is probably worth pursuing on practical grounds because we have a lot of supporting evidence for the proposition that the procedure is tainted by venality and incompetence and thus depicting an opponent during litigation would generally be seen as helpful from a tactical standpoint.

Secondly, we know from the pleadings in the first CAS case that City are also alleging that the charges of which we've been found guilty this time involve a reopening of the settlement agreement which we entered into with UEFA when taking the "pinch" Khaldoon referred to, and there are no grounds for reopening the settlement in this way. That doesn't involve a consideration of the issues on the merits, either. All we can say here is that the settlement agreement is a document governed by Swiss law and Swiss law does allow such settlements to be reopened in certain circumstances; however, the barrier for doing so is usually very high. I understand from people who know far more than I about this stuff that one of the parties to the agreement having decided that it doesn't fancy the terms and conditions any longer doesn't cut it.

I'm completely guessing here, of course, but I note that our case has been listed for three days and it strikes me that arguing through the above, especially if City have as comprehensive a base of evidence as I suspect we do, could take three days on its own. I therefore wonder if we aren't going for a quick win to knock over the ban at an early stage, reserving the option to go back to the CAS for a later hearing on the merits if we need to with the right to ask for the ban to be suspended at that stage.

 

[HalfwayUpTheKippax]

When do the tickets go on sale for this fixture? How many points do you need to get a ticket ? Will sky or BT be showing this event ? Or is it going to be ppv on box office ? Hope we dont run out of chips again !!! Lol !!!

It's an away fixture so there are no loyalty points given out. Although that is a moot point as UEFA have insisted that there is a crowd ban for this fixture, which means that there will be no fans other than the 300 or so cheering UEFA employees in the court stadium.

However, I have a mate who lives on the top floor of a tower block in Lausanne, quite near the venue. I'm going and he said I could bring along a few others. He's got telescopes, binoculars and a parabolic microphone and he is fluent in French, German and bullshit. What could go wrong?

 

[Father Paul]

I

I have really enjoyed reading this thread lately, and credit to the posters offering a little bit of balance. Ultimately that's what will decide this, on balance, one will have a slightly more convincing arguement.

I see it mentioned a fair bit that both sides have so much to lose, i'm not sure i agree with that.

We certainly have so so much to lose. Uefa however, not that much at all. If we win, and by that i mean total clearance (as partial reductions of the ban are no win) this wont be the first or last case made by uefa that gets overturned. It is routine proceedings within a mechanism that exists to do just that. It will set no precedent that hasnt already partially been set, no positions will be lost, nor any meaningful reputation.

FFP itself is not being challenged, nor is uefa, just the process and interpretation of evidence supplied by us, within a timeframe they had to work to, by a separate (i dont want to use the word independent) body within uefa. So they have all the outs they could wish for. Time was too short, the evidence was unclear, basic diffence of interpretation. etc etc etc. We certainly have a lot more to lose.

I agree that this isnt as trivial and as obviously baseless as we'd like to think. For experienced professionals, irrespective of where their motivation might lie, to issue such a verdict and punishment, they must think they have some grounds. No way would they be doing that on rivals' perv
perceived peer pressure, biased media rumourmongering (and both do certainly exist), without Some substance they think they can cling to. We could be 100% right in our eyes (as a club rather than fan commentators), still needs demonstrated in terms suitable to this process. So while i absolutely love the confidence, and buy into it with plenty of hope, i take nothing for granted and recognize it is no givem we will just breeze through clearing this.

I tend to agree the arguments mentioned above could easily be turned upside down and perhaps we are the ones behaving irrationally. One thing for sure I am glad this thing is coming to a conclusion and hopefully in our favour. I believe that a negative outcome will not be as damaging as some seem to think. It will be a setback but no more than that in the European context.

However, we should be somewhat concerned that domestic repercusions would follow on from a bad outcome at CAS.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

NZBlue's point is another excellent one. Ceferin is between a rock and a hard place. CAS is his get-out, whereby he can say that UEFA has done everything it can but CAS let them down. I'd even say it's quite plausible that he gave the nod to the CFCB to confirm the punishment, knowing we'd go to CAS and UEFA would get knocked back. The question is whether City would see it as sufficient vindication to win on what people would see as a technicality.

It is fascinating to try and work out what game Ceferin is playing. His latest remarks are far from a ringing endorsement of of the work of the IC and AC and are a very clear attempt to establish and stress his total independence. This may well be so that he escapes all of the fall out if things go badly pear shaped in CAS. His statements on the possible future reform of FFP also seem to be an attempt to keep all bases open. If City win they hold out the chance of fundamental changes or even the complete end of the regulations so that we don't need to drag UEFA further through the courts: if City lose they can be forgotten.

If City get what we want at CAS though, Ceferin has much greater potential problems with our friends from the G 14 and I'd love to know just how ruthless an operator he is. The most serious threat to UEFA would be a break away league, especially if this involved clubs other than the 14. FIFA's position would be important but FIFA would have to be very careful since Infantino is now under investigation for TV deals going back to his time at UEFA and FIFA has not had such a good time at the hands of the FBI. What comes now is pure espionage fiction-based speculation but could Ceferin now see UEFA as an ally of City and see UEFA's best chance of surviving free from damage as landing blows which weaken G 14 clubs severely? He has stressed recently that the process condemning City "was nothing to do with him" and so throwing Leterme and as many others of the IC and AC to the wolves would be no trouble. It wouldn't be difficult to make the truly shocking decision that Leterme is bent, in the pockets of individual clubs and even foreign powers and must be prosecuted for criminal activity. Similar discoveries could be made concerning UEFA officials who it seems have been using UEFA to further the interests of their clubs, by means which have broken criminal and commercial law. The greatest horror is that these clubs appear to have operated as a cartel, from the courts.with no other aim than cementing their place at the top of football's tree by destroying Manchester City! And corrupt officials at UEFA have cooperated with them! UEFA's stables need cleaning and Alexander is the man to clean them! And we'll see if clubs can still form a breakaway league with many of their officials on the way to chokey while the clubs are paying off whacking fines from the courts.

Is it pure fantasy ....

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It is fascinating to try and work out what game Ceferin is playing. His latest remarks are far from a ringing endorsement of of the work of the IC and AC and are a very clear attempt to establish and stress his total independence. This may well be so that he escapes all of the fall out if things go badly pear shaped in CAS. His statements on the possible future reform of FFP also seem to be an attempt to keep all bases open. If City win they hold out the chance of fundamental changes or even the complete end of the regulations so that we don't need to drag UEFA further through the courts: if City lose they can be forgotten.

If City get what we want at CAS though, Ceferin has much greater potential problems with our friends from the G 14 and I'd love to know just how ruthless an operator he is. The most serious threat to UEFA would be a break away league, especially if this involved clubs other than the 14. FIFA's position would be important but FIFA would have to be very careful since Infantino is now under investigation for TV deals going back to his time at UEFA and FIFA has not had such a good time at the hands of the FBI. What comes now is pure espionage fiction-based speculation but could Ceferin now see UEFA as an ally of City and see UEFA's best chance of surviving free from damage as landing blows which weaken G 14 clubs severely? He has stressed recently that the process condemning City "was nothing to do with him" and so throwing Leterme and as many others of the IC and AC to the wolves would be no trouble. It wouldn't be difficult to make the truly shocking decision that Leterme is bent, in the pockets of individual clubs and even foreign powers and must be prosecuted for criminal activity. Similar discoveries could be made concerning UEFA officials who it seems have been using UEFA to further the interests of their clubs, by means which have broken criminal and commercial law. The greatest horror is that these clubs appear to have operated as a cartel, from the courts.with no other aim than cementing their place at the top of football's tree by destroying Manchester City! And corrupt officials at UEFA have cooperated with them! UEFA's stables need cleaning and Alexander is the man to clean them! And we'll see if clubs can still form a breakaway league with many of their officials on the way to chokey while the clubs are paying off whacking fines from the courts.

Is it pure fantasy ....

Excellent post again. There really is some great stuff on here, better than the media give us.

I'd say it's quite possibly not fantasy. The G-14 must be a thorn in his side, with their constant whingeing and breakaway threats. I'm sure he'd like to see them cowed, and if that involves breaking the back of the likes of Liverpool, the rags, Bayern, PSG then so be it.

I do now wonder whether we've had a quiet word with him to say a shit storm is coming and he can either be on the receiving end and get caught in the crossfire or stand apart from it and still be in charge of UEFA when we've finished with our targets. And, having seen what we've got, he decided discretion was definitely the better part of valour.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Excellent post again. There really is some great stuff on here, better than the media give us.

I'd say it's quite possibly not fantasy. The G-14 must be a thorn in his side, with their constant whingeing and breakaway threats. I'm sure he'd like to see them cowed, and if that involves breaking the back of the likes of Liverpool, the rags, Bayern, PSG then so be it.

I do now wonder whether we've had a quiet word with him to say a shit storm is coming and he can either be on the receiving end and get caught in the crossfire or stand apart from it and still be in charge of UEFA when we've finished with our targets. And, having seen what we've got, he decided discretion was definitely the better part of valour.

I would like this, the only problem is his ties to Agnelli which throws the nice idea under the bus, because Agnelli is the spokesperson for the cartel's nonsense.

My inkling would be we've come to an agreement on FFP for which the IC/AC will be dealt with accordingly. In return we've agreed to being tolerated by the club (hence the fair refereeing display in Madrid) in return for which we play ball with the cartel's interests i.e. let Liverpool have their shenanigans and win the title, hence our "surprise" at their involvement in the PL hateful 8 submissions. I think in the meantime we will pick off a few of our most troublesome but less important targets, and the established figureheads in the cartel will go along as it cements them. So we're not in, but we all play ball a bit because the alternative is too chaotic, for the time being.

I can't reconcile Liverpool getting away with what they have, Ceferin and Agnelli's relationship etc. with us being able to instigate any form of change or reform, even in the unlikely event of complete exoneration, unless we've been making political concessions to be part of the club.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I agree with what you say but I want to make a few points;

I just want balance in reporting, just because someone doesn’t talk about us in absolute c*nty way doesn’t mean he’s not being sly.

Sam is privy to what we read but where is his article on City possibly being cleared, has he mentioned what if Sheik Mansour didn’t make the payments alleged?

has he said what could happen if City are cleared & should charges be laid upon others.

A great article would be 10 things that could happen if City found guilty / innocent.

Sam Lee's credibility was dented by the story he ran a few months back suggesting that UEFA were backing off taking tough action against City. He was ridiculed when they subsequently announced tough sanctions. I don't believe he would have been stupid enough to have written that without info from a good source.
It has been reported that there is an internal feud within EUFA between the pro Qatar camp and those who want to try and re-build the reputation of the organisation. I have wondered since if he was briefed by someone in UEFA from the faction which is more positive towards City.
If this is the case then we should be encouraged by more recent events namely the public criticism of Yves Leterme (including a subtle dig from CAS) and criminal charges being brought against Al Khelaifi. These two are cleary in the "anti-City" camp while Ceferin may be more neutral. This would also explain the more placatory tone from Soriano to the "wider UEFA organisation."

 

[Nellies left peg]

Excellent post again. There really is some great stuff on here, better than the media give us.

I'd say it's quite possibly not fantasy. The G-14 must be a thorn in his side, with their constant whingeing and breakaway threats. I'm sure he'd like to see them cowed, and if that involves breaking the back of the likes of Liverpool, the rags, Bayern, PSG then so be it.

I do now wonder whether we've had a quiet word with him to say a shit storm is coming and he can either be on the receiving end and get caught in the crossfire or stand apart from it and still be in charge of UEFA when we've finished with our targets. And, having seen what we've got, he decided discretion was definitely the better part of valour.

Would you expect this shit storm to come out at our appeal or at a time more suitable. Like just as Henderson steps up to lift the league trophy:-)

 

[nmc]

It is fascinating to try and work out what game Ceferin is playing. His latest remarks are far from a ringing endorsement of of the work of the IC and AC and are a very clear attempt to establish and stress his total independence. This may well be so that he escapes all of the fall out if things go badly pear shaped in CAS. His statements on the possible future reform of FFP also seem to be an attempt to keep all bases open. If City win they hold out the chance of fundamental changes or even the complete end of the regulations so that we don't need to drag UEFA further through the courts: if City lose they can be forgotten.

If City get what we want at CAS though, Ceferin has much greater potential problems with our friends from the G 14 and I'd love to know just how ruthless an operator he is. The most serious threat to UEFA would be a break away league, especially if this involved clubs other than the 14. FIFA's position would be important but FIFA would have to be very careful since Infantino is now under investigation for TV deals going back to his time at UEFA and FIFA has not had such a good time at the hands of the FBI. What comes now is pure espionage fiction-based speculation but could Ceferin now see UEFA as an ally of City and see UEFA's best chance of surviving free from damage as landing blows which weaken G 14 clubs severely? He has stressed recently that the process condemning City "was nothing to do with him" and so throwing Leterme and as many others of the IC and AC to the wolves would be no trouble. It wouldn't be difficult to make the truly shocking decision that Leterme is bent, in the pockets of individual clubs and even foreign powers and must be prosecuted for criminal activity. Similar discoveries could be made concerning UEFA officials who it seems have been using UEFA to further the interests of their clubs, by means which have broken criminal and commercial law. The greatest horror is that these clubs appear to have operated as a cartel, from the courts.with no other aim than cementing their place at the top of football's tree by destroying Manchester City! And corrupt officials at UEFA have cooperated with them! UEFA's stables need cleaning and Alexander is the man to clean them! And we'll see if clubs can still form a breakaway league with many of their officials on the way to chokey while the clubs are paying off whacking fines from the courts.

Is it pure fantasy ....

Good analysis.. it remains to be seen if Ceferin can distance himself sufficiently to survive a shit storm at UEFA
- I’m sure our dear friends in the G14 will be looking to push him under the bus at the first available opportunity even if he’s not responsible. As Head of UEFA he’s in a very precarious position. It’s a Conspiracy Theory -of which I’m not usually a fan but I wouldn’t dismiss Qatar‘s (or however you spell it!) involvement. Many leading figures at UEFA clearly took bungs as part of the WC bid and we know Nicolas Sarkozy was up-to his neck in the WC bid and the PSG takeover - so if cash was being distributed perhaps Yves Leterme wasn’t a million miles away ? Clearly PSG have leveraged some influence at UEFA from nowhere. That might go some way to explaining why he buried the PSG enquiry so conveniently. Of course that’s all speculation on my part but this feels like more than a bit of jealousy on the part of the G14 clubs - it feels like someone waging war against our owners.

I think the other thing to remember is that the G14 clubs - although seen acting as a unit are not a particularly collaborative bunch - sure they are united against us but they so many individual battles to fight - they are fraught with jealousy and petty squabbling. United and Liverpool, Real and Barcelona, Munich and Dortmund, Juventus and Inter ! Hardly natural bedfellows any of them. When this kicks off I wouldn’t expect all the G14 to act as one or to necessarily have the courage of their convictions.

 

[lancs blue]

Reading this thread, I am struck by the fact that Bluemooners have got much closer to the truth than the national press. Ok, we are naturally biassed and some of our posts are wide of the mark but, generally speaking, we present a strong analytical case.

There used to be many good investigative journalists on the national press but, since online reporting became the major outlet, clickbait has sadly become the norm.