Soriano's interview after the UEFA verdict implied that the decision was largely, if not totally, predicated on what was published in Der Spiegel. The club has repeatedly cited "out of context emails" as being the basis for the decision. Following the settlement, UEFA had three years of scrutinising every aspect of our finances. What is very unusual is that the infraction is supposed to have happened over a four-year period that pre and post-dates the settlement. I cannot see how they have managed to obtain any further evidence against us. The cynic in me suggests that the IC has tried to make the evidence fit a crime that does not exist. The settlement was agreed because of matters unresolved. I think that they have looked into the unresolved matters and fabricated a violation. City's bullish language about Leterme's handling of the investigation makes no secret of the club's disdain for the integrity of the IC. When you read that Leterme deliberately mishandled PSG's case to reach the statute of limitations, coupled with Rick Parry coincidentally jumping ship to the EFL before CAS could pass judgement, you realise that something may not be right. City's statement spoke of a wish to seek independent arbitration. It could well be that we withdrew from the process, leaving the AC no choice but to hit us hard. There are serious issues surrounding the impartiality of the CFCB and we perhaps chose not to dignify it. It also appears that there is a lot of internal disagreement between the independent actors at UEFA (Ceferin) and those with vested interests. I believe that we do have friends at UEFA but these people are under immense pressure from a very powerful cartel of clubs. No CAS arbitrator would sabotage their own reputation for the sake of saving the credibility of UEFA. The fact that a lengthy appeal determination will be made public is absolutely integral to a fair and transparent process. We will get this in time and it makes a corrupt judgement significantly harder to inflict upon City. UEFA had the luxury of never having to be accountable to the public for their actions. In full knowledge of this, they were at liberty to pass a much more questionable judgement.