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

[Centurions]

can you be a bit more specific

He's talking about the piece Ornstein did in the Athletic I think, The DM are carrying it too.

 

[waspish]

Il Capo dei Capi - soon...

Capo dei capi (Italian: [ˈkaːpo dei ˈkaːpi]; "boss of [the] bosses") or capo di tutti i capi (Italian: [ˈkaːpo di ˈtutti i ˈkaːpi]; "boss of all [the] bosses") or Godfather (Italian: Padrino) are terms used mainly by the media, public and law enforcement community to indicate a supremely powerful crime boss in the Sicilian or American Mafia who holds great influence over the whole organization. The term was introduced to the U.S. public by the Kefauver Commission in 1950.[1]

 

[Marvin]

So much for the primacy of the UEFA adjudicatory chamber if they are vacillating all over the place. We are told by a member on here that City's COO told the City Matters fan forum that the UEFA President Ceferin was trying to broker a negotiated settlement involving City accepting a nominal fine but no ban but that City turned this down. Sam Lee's comments about his sources, the Silverake investment etc all support the belief that UEFA had softened its stance.

The problem is not technical. Opponents of City like David Conn accept that the Etihad sponsorship was fulfilled by the UAE state and not Sheikh Mansour (as suggested by the Football Leaks). I think if it was just a case of City presenting the evidence it would be dead by now.

The problem is political. Rival clubs want a piece of City. City's owner is a wealthy Arab and persona non grata. City are in the hands of a group of judges now. I am not sure why we should trust them any more than we should trust the UEFA AC. They are drawn from exactly the same milieu of people.

 

[domalino]

I think if it was just a case of City presenting the evidence it would be dead by now.

Don't forget that one of the main parts of City's CAS complaint from May was that the IC had made judgement without allowing the club to fully present it's case, didn't respond to requests of information and didn't follow their own processes.

 

[KS55]

So much for the primacy of the UEFA adjudicatory chamber if they are vacillating all over the place. We are told by a member on here that City's COO told the City Matters fan forum that the UEFA President Ceferin was trying to broker a negotiated settlement involving City accepting a nominal fine but no ban but that City turned this down. Sam Lee's comments about his sources, the Silverake investment etc all support the belief that UEFA had softened its stance.

The problem is not technical. Opponents of City like David Conn accept that the Etihad sponsorship was fulfilled by the UAE state and not Sheikh Mansour (as suggested by the Football Leaks). I think if it was just a case of City presenting the evidence it would be dead by now.

The problem is political. Rival clubs want a piece of City. City's owner is a wealthy Arab and persona non grata. City are in the hands of a group of judges now. I am not sure why we should trust them any more than we should trust the UEFA AC. They are drawn from exactly the same milieu of people.

I doubt any of the judges will be in the pay of Bayern, unlike Leterme.

 

[oakiecokie]

Thst Swiss ramble is a bunch of shit with some graphs stapled to it, adds nothing and talks about nothing and assumes our guilt.

Do you understand what its actually saying ??

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Il Capo dei Capi - soon...

Il Capo dei Capi - was a six-part Italian miniseries

You referencing the possible six clubs that are behind all this with the UEFA boss at the head of it : )

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I doubt any of the judges will be in the pay of Bayern, unlike Leterme.

I'm not entirely sure milieu is the correct word to deploy either. Judges tend to keep themselves to themselves. It's usually an isolated existence and can be a very lonely job.

 

[CharliesRightPeg]

The same blog now alleges Alti fan is following the same template.

He does give relevant figures to back it up

There was a thread a couple of years ago, showing points per game under different refs

When City are averaging say 2.2 ppg and 1.75 ppg vs top 6 and then under a small group of refs we consistently get 1 ppg and 0.5 ppg, it's a flag.
When say utd are getting 1.5 ppg and 1 ppg vs top 6, then under a small group of refs they consistently get 2.5 ppg and 2 ppg, it's a flag.
When this is the same group of refs, that's another flag.

Ppg above indicative only, to show how these flags are first raised.

Not evidence but a flag to look at and think, this needs looking at deeper.

Walton went way past a flag and straight into the wtf zone

 

[meltonblue]

It can’t be considered irrefutable if they refused to look at it.

They built, made and hung their entire case on stolen emails.

I would also like to see those emails.

The thing with an email, it’s all about context. It won’t prove a thing as long as the books say otherwise.

That UEFA were trying to broker a deal whilst putting their whole investigation on hacked emails, tells me they were shitting it.

I genuinely don’t think they expected us to say fuck off. They assumed we would take a deal.

The velocity of the punishment is akin to the reaction of a petulant teenager.

I just don’t believe they didn’t look at it. I agree on the point about the books to an extent, although the AC clearly feel like they have enough evidence regardless. I’m not sure what context can be added to a few of the emails tbh, which is why I personally really want to see what our defence was/is. If it is on procedural issues as well as the admissibility then that’s fine.