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

[Centurions]

no mate? There was an interview with Kev with that reliable Belgian journalist where Kev basically said one year would be ok I guess but two years would be a problem

I think he was being sarcastic.

 

[Gazza]

no mate? There was an interview with Kev with that reliable Belgian journalist where Kev basically said one year would be ok I guess but two years would be a problem

I know all this, my original comment was meant as a light-hearted joke about me and other City fans being pessimistic.

 

[Big Pussy Bonpensiero]

Anyone stupid enough to actually do that can't be helped regardless.

Anyone stupid enough to inject heroin into them can’t be helped for the most part either, but dealers aren’t described as having a sense of humour for selling it. Gambling is up there as one of the worst forms of addiction, it’s not humorous or helpful by the companies who glamourise it and make it seem like it’s harmless. It’s enticing the most vulnerable.

 

[Bodicoteblue]

Presumably then, if we did submit our clearest evidence, the AC were unfazed by the prospect of effectively deeming our accounts fraudulent then? Or would that not have been an issue for them, and they rather made their judgment on our failure to come up with a credible explanation for the content of those emails?

Do we have to come up with an explanation of those emails?
Surely the onus is on uefa to prove that the actions implied in those emails actually occurred.

 

[KS55]

Do we have to come up with an explanation of those emails?
Surely the onus is on uefa to prove that the actions implied in those emails actually occurred.

Surely correct. Has any journo pointed this out? It is so basic.

 

[madden150]

Surely correct. Has any journo pointed this out? It is so basic.

Surely the proof would be the sponsorship funds entering Citys accounts. I've always thought this was what City deemed to be their irrefutable evidence.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

Do we have to come up with an explanation of those emails?
Surely the onus is on uefa to prove that the actions implied in those emails actually occurred.

If I was on a jury and someone on trial was in our situation, I’d want either a credible explanation for those emails and/or evidence of what we actually did. A “prove it” defence wouldn’t cut any ice with me, and my gut says it wouldn’t have cut any ice with CAS either. We’d look guilty by omission in my opinion. But I’m not a lawyer and have no real idea what CAS will/will not accept

 

[Ballet-on-ice]

Are you calling me love, or asking me if I have a problem with love? It’s about as fucking obvious as one of Paul Hawksbys jokes

Get a grip of yourself sweetheart.

 

[bluemanchester]

It could have meant "as soon as possible" referring to appealing to CAS. I think one thing we know about our owners is they try to make the right decision at the right time. If CAS decide they should uphold UEFA's ruling, the reasoning behind CAS' decision will be important before deciding the next step.

Yes, if CAS make that decision their reasoning behind upholding the ban will be very important. But my view is it will have to be something that will stop the owners dead in their tracks and as yet I have read nothing or even anyone on here suggesting UEFA have that in their locker. Anyway only six more days unless there are any leaks.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

If I was on a jury and someone on trial was in our situation, I’d want either a credible explanation for those emails and/or evidence of what we actually did. A “prove it” defence wouldn’t cut any ice with me, and my gut says it wouldn’t have cut any ice with CAS either. We’d look guilty by omission in my opinion. But I’m not a lawyer and have no real idea what CAS will/will not accept

We have provided the evidence at CAS. The flow of money is clear.

 

[laserblue]

The AC can call for further evidence, not limited to what the IC submit.

But did they? Did City's evidence get a hearing there? The IC and the AC are two cheeks of the same arse as far as I can make out.

 

[bluemanchester]

Projectriver has highlighted, with fairly inarguable reason, several times on here why this (CAS) is likely to be the end of the line in terms of legal challenges

Projectriver has indeed contributed honestly and I for one enjoy reading his take on things. But even he says most of his posts are his opinion. Khaldoon said, in the first instance, my view is that first, they go to CAS and if they do not overturn the ban there will be a second "instance". Only six more days to wait, then we can start another thread. I wonder what the title will be.

 

[laserblue]

We have provided the evidence at CAS. The flow of money is clear.

Clear in a good way I hope ;)

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

We have provided the evidence at CAS. The flow of money is clear.

Cheers TH. If that’s right then that’s very good news and I can’t see that UEFA has much of a case! Did we produce that same evidence to the AC do you know?

 

[pudge]

So we're a week away by all accounts from the verdict.

I wonder which "journalist" for rent is going to crack first and leak it for the exclusive.

 

[JimmyGrimble10]

Good god, it’s going to be a long seven days to discover our faith.

 

[oakiecokie]

So we're a week away by all accounts from the verdict.

I wonder which "journalist" for rent is going to crack first and leak it for the exclusive.

Tolmie. ;)

 

[Mr HJ]

We have provided the evidence at CAS. The flow of money is clear.

Correct plus in any legal hearing the burden to prove any wrong doing is always on the prosecution. How this case pans out is all about if UEFA have any other clear evidence of wrong doing - if not, we're cleared, if they have it will not pan out so good. From those who have more info than I it seems that UEFA's case is based mainly on the hacked emails - that makes me believe the ban will be overturned.

 

[Tb1981]

We have provided the evidence at CAS. The flow of money is clear.

Was this given to uefa?
Did they ignore it or not see it?

 

[slbsn]

Projectriver has indeed contributed honestly and I for one enjoy reading his take on things. But even he says most of his posts are his opinion. Khaldoon said, in the first instance, my view is that first, they go to CAS and if they do not overturn the ban there will be a second "instance". Only six more days to wait, then we can start another thread. I wonder what the title will be.

Just to be clear, I think it's possible City do take it to the Swiss Federal Tribunal if they lose. But, it will be very likely to fail, won't be quick and I doubt it would injunct the ban. On top of that you can't run round saying you have irrefutable evidence, that we welcome the opportunity for CAS to clear us, that we've done nothing wrong, lose at CAS and maintain credibility.