Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.
You mean Gill wont be telling Stone?
UEFA will have to release that evidence to CAS, I read their statement as meaning there will be no public disclosure until the CAS verdict is announced.
I feel we may (and should) persue damages when the dust clears
Don’t think it works entirely like that, and I’m not an expert. I think we both get a chance to pick from a list.
If / when City appeal, could take months for the hearing - if so I presume City cant be banned next season if the appeal hasnt started?
Can UEFA afford to give us around £450m + legal fees if they play hardball and lose? (Loss of revenue + damages)
Hacked emails can be used as evidence, even in a court they can if they are relevant to the investigation except UEFA isn't a court so that doesn't matter.
The case will come down to what evidence UEFA has been able to compile to supplement the leaked emails. If its the leaked emails and tumbleweed (which is what City are hedging), then I reckon we will give 'em an absolute bath in CAS - after all we are in a position of power in all this, in terms of having access to 'context documents' that UEFA simply has no jurisdiction to get - even with whatever information gathering powers they have under FFP. If UEFA has done the hard yards, corroborated what is implied by the dirty emails through other evidence - then we are up a creek most likely, and deservedly so if other evidence can support their arguments to show we 'misled them' about the source of funding underlying sponsorship (not the very clearly chosen words in UEFAs statmeent - this is not about 'overvaluing' our sponsorships, but 'overstating' them - which to me suggests a focus on the source of the funds in the case of UEFA, not the absolute quantum (which was what got us the first time around)
But if UEFA has been bluffing, and the hacked emails are basically it, then if our lawyers are worth anything like what we will pay them, then we will have them over a barrel.
Its a fascinating example of John Nash 'game theory' at play. Lots of brikmanship, lots of gamesmanship, lots of strategy based on 'i think they know this, or think this, or have this'. It seems likely one party or the other will take a heavy beating if it is all played out either in CAS or later on in the courts. Hence my view is that the most likely outcome of CAS is a negotiated settlement with a much lower punishment.
Our erstwhile club chairman perhaps...
They mena it won't be released pubilcly. CAS will have access to the information.