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

[BringBackSwales]

But the leaker in chief has left....allegedly

Just one cunnt in a group of cunnts

 

[rickmcfc]

Still think the ban will be reduced but not lifted. Based on a vague intuition.

I don’t see this. We are either guilty or not guilty.

 

[Plain Speaking]

I don’t see this. We are either guilty or not guilty.

We are trying to work around the rules without breaking them, it depends how CAS interpret our actions, it's not black or white

 

[alexmcity]

I don’t see this. We are either guilty or not guilty.

Or CAS finds us guilty but not to the extent that we deserve a 2-year ban. Reduction is a real possibility.

 

[Plain Speaking]

My concern about Pep emphasising he has been told we are confident we will have the ban overturned is that of him have justifiable reason to leave if we're unsuccessful at CAS.

 

[simon23]

Just for clarification, Rob Harris is the absolute thundercùnt who asked Pep if he was taking backhanders on the day we won the treble, and yet will not answer if he receives payments from Qatar for his appearances on Al Jazeera!

He asked what!?!????!!!!

What in gods hell woukd even prompt such a question i dont even understand its relevance...just that its hugely insulting!

 

[cityzen81]

Or CAS finds us guilty but not to the extent that we deserve a 2-year ban. Reduction is a real possibility.

Not so, if found guilty it will be our second breach and a 2 year ban for such actions would be seen as warranted by CAS.

We will either be banned or not, no middle ground now it has gone to CAS

 

[Bill Walker]

Tariq Panja was on the guardian pod last week muttering something about it being a massive surprise if we are found not guilty. It matters not to any of them whether we are guilty of not, they just want to see us destroyed.

It's all based around jealousy, ignore them.
City have brought hundreds of millions into the game, how can paying clubs like Leicester and Everton many millions be a bad thing?
It all helps them surely.

 

[1961_vintage]

Rob Harris should be banned by the club from stepping foot in the Etihad. The man is beyond contempt.

Totally disagree. He should be personally invited, warmly welcomed, escorted to City Square to participate in the pre-match shenanigans, interviewed on stage and then taken backstage to have the shit kicked out of him.

 

[alexmcity]

Not so, if found guilty it will be our second breach and a 2 year ban for such actions would be seen as warranted by CAS.

We will either be banned or not, no middle ground now it has gone to CAS

I agree with the poster who said it's not white or black. Circumstances matter, there might be mitigating factors, etc.

 

[Winchester]

It's all based around jealousy, ignore them.
City have brought hundreds of millions into the game, how can paying clubs like Leicester and Everton many millions be a bad thing?
It all helps them surely.

Come on Monica!!

 

[Ballymagash Blue]

My concern about Pep emphasising he has been told we are confident we will have the ban overturned is that of him have justifiable reason to leave if we're unsuccessful at CAS.

You're not the only one with that interpretation.

 

[Mid Wales blue]

The question starts at about 3.40 on the link below. It was from the post match presser after Liverpool and embargoed until last night.
Anyone know who the journalist asking the question was? I recognise a fair few but not this guy.

At 03:30 “Pep” about the sentence, we are winning!

 

[Centurions]

Not so, if found guilty it will be our second breach and a 2 year ban for such actions would be seen as warranted by CAS.

We will either be banned or not, no middle ground now it has gone to CAS

Nonsense, for starters UEFA claim we didn't cooperate without specifying on what exactly. If it's just a case of not having the requested information to hand (for instance) do you really think CAS will agree a 2 year ban is warranted? What if UEFA demanded we produce Etihad s accounts which we don't have any right to do?

 

[chesterguy]

I agree with the poster who said it's not white or black. Circumstances matter, there might be mitigating factors, etc.

None of us know what any of the circumstances are involved. We have been investiagted by an organisation which has been proven to be corrupt. We have now referred the matter to an independent orgainsation to see what they think. For all we know it may be an open and shut case that is what CAS is there to determine. City claim they are working within the rules we shall see what the first truly independent body thinks.

Its a bit like the new device on the Mercedes car Red Bull think it broke the rules an independent assessor disagreed the point is UEFA have shown in previous cases that they are not as independent as they should be

 

[kippaxwarrior]

Rob Harris on SSN just now . Saying that if City do win at CAS, then what next for FFP, as City have now been able to get around it.

So what he's saying is that even if City are found not guilty at CAS, we have still been able to side step the FPP rules. So we are still guilty in his eyes. Tosser

He actually claimed one of his articles he wrote about City and FFP was a major reason why UFEA started its investigation. He said it while smiling

 

[BringBackSwales]

You're not the only one with that interpretation.

I thought he said he was staying whatever happened in that respect?

 

[slbsn]

Nonsense, for starters UEFA claim we didn't cooperate without specifying on what exactly. If it's just a case of not having the requested information to hand (for instance) do you really think CAS will agree a 2 year ban is warranted? What if UEFA demanded we produce Etihad s accounts which we don't have any right to do?

Erm, then we wouldn't be banned. The point is that for CAS to consider a ban (of any kind) is upheld, it will have to conclude, at least: a) City are in breach of FFP b) that is a second breach ie a breach of the second chance c) that UEFA's allegations (which must amount to saying that at least City concealed the "truth") are well founded. In those circumstances, how is a 2 year ban not proportionate.

Co-operation is a red herring. If CAS find City did not inflate the sponsorship, they are not going to say "but we still think it's worthy a 1 year ban because of a failure to cooperate". If City are found to have breached, co-operation is neither here nor there.

 

[BringBackSwales]

He actually claimed one of his articles he wrote about City and FFP was a major reason why UFEA started its investigation. He said it while smiling

RHIAFC

 

[BringBackSwales]

None of us know what any of the circumstances are involved. We have been investiagted by an organisation which has been proven to be corrupt. We have now referred the matter to an independent orgainsation to see what they think. For all we know it may be an open and shut case that is what CAS is there to determine. City claim they are working within the rules we shall see what the first truly independent body thinks.

Its a bit like the new device on the Mercedes car Red Bull think it broke the rules an independent assessor disagreed the point is UEFA have shown in previous cases that they are not as independent as they should be

Uefa “not as independent as they should be” is a bit like saying adolf fucking hitler was a bit of a naughty boy