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

[Saddleworth2]

Whilst I don’t agree with every word of it, an interesting article by Howard Hockin from the perspective of being a fan.

https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/the-fatigue-of-being-a-manchester-city-fan/

 

[Kakhaber The Great]

I’m not a fan of Liew and his turgid writing style, but based on the construction of that sentence I’m not sure I agree with your analysis of those words.

My error. I have re-read and understood the context in which 'sub-human' was deployed.

Mea culpa, Gordon, mea culpa.

 

[George Hannah]

I still can't work out why it took 6 months before CAS decided City's complaint should be rejected because it could be addressed by the Adjudicatory Chamber after all. The damage was already done, the probity of the Investigatory stage was destroyed by fundamental confidentiality requirements being repeatedly breached by Leterme. In such circumstances UEFA's entire sanction process was openly undermined and exposed as a wholly corrupt and racist attack on us.

 

[OrigamiNinja]

I'd not really looked at the argument before, but Parisian put it brilliantly last night.

Does UEFA seriously consider City would only be able to charge £8m per annum for the sponsoring of our shirt, stadium and training campus?

And the next time someone you hear or know states we have been inflating our sponsorship, kindly tell them to fuck off in the general above pertinent point.

UEFA was already on record as stating the Etihad deal was fair value (ten years ago) nor a related party.

So which is it, we are inflating sponsorship that is deemed fair value, or the Etihad cash is being topped up by a non-related party!

UEFA are really questioning where a sponsor is getting their funds from to pay for sponsorship of a football club. Only, it isn't really any of their business and if they think it is, why are all other sponsors within the game not subjected to the same scrutiny?

 

[SouthStandStander]

You really shouldn't.

CAS need to throw this out stating the process was flawed while on the QT City agree not pursue it further.

What do City have to gain from that. The damage to our reputation has been done.
I don't want us getting off on a technicality.
City should go for the jugular and ruin the fuckers.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

You really shouldn't.

CAS need to throw this out stating the process was flawed while on the QT City agree not pursue it further.

maybe so..but we need to make sure that this doesn't happen again further down the line. Hence the stance we have taken - we took the pinch last time under their corrupt governing rule. Our owners who do world wide business and are reported to conduct that business with both honour and confidentiality and have just been thrown to the dogs by UEFA

That shouldn't and hasn't gone down well at all.

 

[tonea2003]

the indupitability of your perlocution is invincible.

you've always talked tosh :-)

 

[Parisian]

This is an interesting comment from the head of commercial activities of OctagonUK, one of the partner of UEFA and trusted audit firm used for fair value market assessment.

He wonders why Puma made this statement. If they weren't sure, it would have been best for them not to comment. So City must have given them solid proof of being cleared in an appeal.

This is 2014 Octagon valuation of City sponsorship :



Worth noting that the minimum value given to Etihad deal is 40 and maximum is 50. Even though it is lower than the actual deal, it is nowhere near close to the 8 M figure. This alone should tell the attacks on City aren't legit.

 

[cityzen81]

Can you clarify where this information comes from?

My guess would more likely be, if requested CAS will suspend a ban providing that the appeal is not seen as trying to get around the ban and that it would adversely affect the competition if it wasn't suspended , ie it has merit. I don't believe that CAS will look at likely success so if they do suspend the ban then we shouldn't assume that its a sign of likely success

Sorry probably used the wrong chose of words. It will be based on an assessment of the merits of City's appeal.

CAS dont just automatically suspend a ban at the request of an individual or organisation. From my understanding (im not a lawyer or anything and like everyone on here we have just read a lot about it from previous cases etc) you have to have put forward a case that shows you have a chance of success at appeal. IF CAS do suspend the ban then it does indeed mean the case we put forward to them has a chance of success. Weather that means a reduction of ban/fine or acquittal remains to be seen

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

UEFA are really questioning where a sponsor is getting their funds from to pay for sponsorship of a football club. Only, it isn't really any of their business and if they think it is, why are all other sponsors within the game not subjected to the same scrutiny?

Is exactly what one of our points should hopefully be

Bayern being just one