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

[supercity88]

It's a question which still bugs me.

Why did City go directly to CAS in an attempt to circumnavigate the process by Uefa?

City must surely have known it was a Hail Mary at best, knowing CAS couldn't do anything at that stage?

Throughout this whole process, it doesn't sit right, counsel would have known this.

Some have suggested it was simply a shot across UEFA's bow, but I think it was much more nuanced than that?

We needed to plant a seed to permeate CAS, there has to be more than City just trying to head Uefa off at the pass, knowing CAS couldn't get involved at that stage in the proceedings?

I think we had enough evidence of a lack of due process from UEFA that it made sense to go straight to CAS and try and get it thrown out with our legal advice probably confirming it would be unlikely to succeed but that positively we would have shown alarming information to CAS on how this whole thing had been conducted. The ruling was clear and would have been seen as a success by City I'm sure, who must have known the case wouldn't be thrown out at that stage but had used the chance to frame their position. You then go to the appeal and are able to keep hammering home to CAS that your previous evidence was correct, and you play to the fact CAS were concerned by that information.

 

[Coatigan]

Not long to wait now I guess. Probably looking at three weeks tops. Maybe rumours will start to emerge in the coming days/weeks before the verdict is given. Just don’t think anything should be read into the fact that there’s been no leaks so far. There’s only been seven working days since the hearing ended.

Ric, I think you are giving the initial point way too much seriousness. I know the situation is grim and this a thread of law, politik-play and higher motivations, but there was a bit of humour in there amongst it all, as I read it at least. I doubt the poster genuinely thinks no news means we've won.

 

[Coatigan]

It's a question which still bugs me.

Why did City go directly to CAS in an attempt to circumnavigate the process by Uefa?

City must surely have known it was a Hail Mary at best, knowing CAS couldn't do anything at that stage?

Throughout this whole process, it doesn't sit right, counsel would have known this.

Some have suggested it was simply a shot across UEFA's bow, but I think it was much more nuanced than that?

We needed to plant a seed to permeate CAS, there has to be more than City just trying to head Uefa off at the pass, knowing CAS couldn't get involved at that stage in the proceedings?

100% agree, never sat right. Even more so after reading the outcome decision, i genuinely can't decide if it is some as of yet stroke of genius, or totally rash and daft which revealed our hand and prematurely dismissed certain arguements as much as it sent a 'warning shot' or tested the waters.

I would doubt they really did think they could nip it in the bud.

 

[Coatigan]

Partly setting the scene and narrative with CAS, and getting conclusions from CAS that have clearly resonated with the puppet string pullers at UEFA as they've shut up a lot more.

But did any of that occur? On paper, all that resulted in is a failed attempt at throwing the case out early, established that process wasn't breached, anf that CAS show no pity but legal rigour only.
Arguably strengthens the case as much as it weakens it, at least as can be spun to the wider public. I still am not comfortable with it tbh.

 

[Coatigan]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAFegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw2h3874Ro_fTYF8cp2P0CLn

Page 19 / 20

Uefa argued with ac Milan about when they should appeal and argued that the appeal should have been made when the referral was issued. Hence City had to appeal to CAS at that stage just to make sure Uefa didn't try to get it kicked out at a later stage by claiming we didn't appeal at the correct time

In fact Uefa tried to argue that we shouldn't have appealed at this stage in direct opposition to their own arguement vs ac Milan and cas agreed we had to appeal because the Uefa guidance was unclear

Nothing, if not consistent, our Uefa.

So, nothing then.

 

[SWP's back]

We are just waiting now. I'd normally say it was agony but I am very relaxed. I am confident we will win the appeal.
1. Khaldoon and Soriano have been strong in their assertions that we have not breached. They have given their absolute word to Pep and his staff, to the players, to everybody that works for City and, most importantly, to the fans. They are honourable men who would not lie in this way. True, they are businessmen and businesses sometimes sail close to the wind. Unless these guys have made a big mistake that Uefa has uncovered, we will prevail.
2. Fine work by Stefan and Colin has made it easy for us to see the case clearly and Uefa's looks thin.
3. Er...we are the new City and the old typical City is dead.

Very true. I was given great confidence by Pep talking about getting enough points to confirm CL qualification. He didn’t bother caveating it with “it were successful in our appeal”.

That tells me the club are still supremely confident.

 

[Centurions]

The lack of any leak actually helps to some degree, as it only underlines our argument that prior to CAS, the Uefa chambers had been compromised.

Which is perhaps at least one(?) of the reasons for the initial appeal? With no further leaks it just reinforces how UEFA were acting before getting castigated by CAS. If the leaks had continued it would have looked even worse for UEFA. It seems to have been a win, win situation for ourselves.

 

[Ric]

Ric, I think you are giving the initial point way too much seriousness. I know the situation is grim and this a thread of law, politik-play and higher motivations, but there was a bit of humour in there amongst it all, as I read it at least. I doubt the poster genuinely thinks no news means we've won.

Ah, apologies if I misread it.

 

[eastmanc]

100% agree, never sat right. Even more so after reading the outcome decision, i genuinely can't decide if it is some as of yet stroke of genius, or totally rash and daft which revealed our hand and prematurely dismissed certain arguements as much as it sent a 'warning shot' or tested the waters.

I would doubt they really did think they could nip it in the bud.

Do you think that by going to CAS early this motivated UEFA to extend their punishment to us or do you think, like I do, it was always their intention to ban us for two years because this case is about politics.

 

[Coatigan]

Do you think that by going to CAS early this motivated UEFA to extend their punishment to us or do you think, like I do, it was always their intention to ban us for two years because this case is about politics.

As i understand it, two seasons is the standard. Lots of clubs have been given 2 season bans for FFP breaches. Doubt it had anything to do with our initial appeal, politics, probably, below the surface, but not inconsistent however

 

[Fordyboy46]

A confirmed new signing for next season in the next couple of weeks ,could be the biggest hint that we've been successful in our appeal. I'm still sticking to a year ban, with one year suspended.

 

[slbsn]

A confirmed new signing for next season in the next couple of weeks ,could be the biggest hint that we've been successful in our appeal. I'm still sticking to a year ban, with one year suspended.

This would require CAS to conclude: yes City misled UEFA, lied about its FFP submission, falsified its accounts to match the lie, failed FFP for a second time in 6 years but we think we should suspend half the sanction in case City breach for a third time in the next 2-3 years.

One year suspended sounds plausible but its not realistic in these circumstances, IMO...

 

[HelloCity]

But did any of that occur? On paper, all that resulted in is a failed attempt at throwing the case out early, established that process wasn't breached, anf that CAS show no pity but legal rigour only.
Arguably strengthens the case as much as it weakens it, at least as can be spun to the wider public. I still am not comfortable with it tbh.

I mean, are you sat shaking at the thought we went to CAS 6 months ago?

We probably went early to help stop leaks which were damaging the case and the club. Leaks which stopped as soon as the case was submitted.

If UEFA were acting illegally throughout the process then we must have thought CAS needed to know about it as soon as possible. As it happens CAS were concerned about it as well but couldn’t do more until the process was completed.

CAS therefore knew at the start of the 2nd submission that we weren’t just pulling an excuse out of the bag based on the outcome of that process and that we were legitimately concerned enough to question things prior to the processes conclusion.

It’s nothing that any fan should be concerned about, especially 6 months after it happened.

 

[Coatigan]

I mean, are you sat shaking at the thought we went to CAS 6 months ago?

We probably went early to help stop leaks which were damaging the case and the club. Leaks which stopped as soon as the case was submitted.

If UEFA were acting illegally throughout the process then we must have thought CAS needed to know about it as soon as possible. As it happens CAS were concerned about it as well but couldn’t do more until the process was completed.

CAS therefore knew at the start of the 2nd submission that we weren’t just pulling an excuse out of the bag based on the outcome of that process and that we were legitimately concerned enough to question things prior to the processes conclusion.

It’s nothing that any fan should be concerned about, especially 6 months after it happened.

I'm beither sat shaking nor concerned, i'm making a point on something i questioned at the time, and still do particularly after the result. I stand by what i think of that, based what i'm capable of knowing about it all. Which admittedly is not much, but hardly drastically less than most punters.

In fairness i posted that in response to another point, before i read all the subsequent posts pointing out the logic of using that as a way to address the leaks, and cover the timing of an appeal based on previous precedent. So those have at least given anither dinension i hadn't considered.

Whether it was worth it, i don't and can't know, time will tell. Currently doesn't feel like it, but at least the club are trying everything.

 

[BLUEMATT23]

So was interesting to hear Pep Wednesday night mention champions league qualifying for next season, and it didnt contain a "but".
Also other players mentioned it to.
Question is have they all forgot we may get banned? Or are they maybe privvy to something, ie exonaration?
Which of the 2 is it?

 

[Ric]

So was interesting to hear Pep Wednesday night mention champions league qualifying for next season, and it didnt contain a "but".
Also other players mentioned it to.
Question is have they all forgot we may get banned? Or are they maybe privvy to something, ie exonaration?
Which of the 2 is it?

They probably just trusted Soriano when he told them we are innocent, and have put it to the back of their minds to concentrate on on-the-pitch matters.

 

[BLUEMATT23]

They probably just trusted Soriano when he told them we are innocent, and have put it to the back of their minds to concentrate on on-the-pitch matters.

Hi Ric
Yes quite possibly and maybe been told not to discuss it in public.
I am very confident however that the club will be exonerated.
There's too many holes for me in UEFA's case that makes me confident.

 

[deano ou812]

Think too many are reading to much into peps comments after weds and champions league qualification,as it stands we are in a champions league position when the CAS verdict comes out we will know one way or the other ..

 

[Dirty Harry]

Not looking into it at all, but commentary, media stuff, prior to the CAS hearing were simply saying "Man City banned from the Champions League for two years", now seem to be tagging "depending on the outcome of their appeal at the CAS hearing" on the end now, don't know if anyone else has noticed.

 

[mike1923]

I disagree. Non-co-operation is, as you say, a serious allegation in its own right and, if the main allegation were to fail, UEFA could argue that it reached its decision because they weren't in possession of the full facts due to City's non-co-operation. Therefore the ban should be upheld. Two separate matters independent of each other either of which merit a ban thus providing two bites of the cherry.

would the CAS not likely say there’s no basis for a charge but City you lot have acted like dicks and could have nipped it in the bud and next time you waste our time there will be consequences?