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

[sir baconface]

Many of us have been saying to take this approach for years. I have no idea why we have been so feeble in dealing with these rats, maybe it's a different cultural approach from our owners?

Surely they must have realised by now unless we start to fight back and hurt them they will never let up??

Just my take but I believe our owners have avoided wheeling out the big cannons just so long as there’s an available compromise that’s not too difficult to swallow. That’s not to say that’s a situation that will continue to hold. I see them as proud people who will come out fighting if painted into a corner.

Anyway...we are the fcukin Champions!

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

STILL ENJOYING OUR PREMIER WIN HERE. They wont be spoiling it for me, it's all hot air. You'll been suckered into feeling shite, just like opposition fans now have something to feel good about. All hot air

WE WON THE LEAGUE NAH NAH NAH NANNANA..... And bitter LFC media fanboys cannot take that away, the records will always say "City best team ever"

 

[razman]

According to the Guardian, the club have upped the ante a bit with their response to the NYT article -

This would be presumed to include further internal financial evidence and an explanation of the emails. The statement protested that the IC process itself has been the subject of leaks. “Manchester City FC is fully cooperating in good faith with the CFCB IC’s ongoing investigation,” the statement said.


.

This is new....will be very interesting.

Explanation of emails and further internal finances

 

[doobyedoobye]

We were never going to be accepted by the ruling elite so what's changed? A one year ban from the CL and some opposition fans claiming our titles were only won because we allegedly circumnavigated FFP unfairly? As long as the club continues as is what's the problem? Players refusing to join and sponsors backing away? Hardly.

 

[Parisian]

So if that's true, surely the precedent has been set with UEFA's punishment of PSG when they devalued their 'related party' sponsorship (if Etihad is deemed to be a related party - the case for which seems neither here nor there) and fined them? Why would we be banned if PSG weren't?

PSG has been sanctioned only one time and it was at the same time City got their similar sanctions.

Why would they ban PSG if PSG comply with the rules : they applied retroactive devaluations and PSG balanced the books by selling players accordingly. Thus, PSG is within the rules of FFP and cannot be punished.

The trick is that, even after PSG compliance, they tried to devaluate the sponsors further more. Since PSG couldn't sell any more players (the last market window for those 3 years was already over), it would have meant PSG would be punished despite their best efforts and cooperation. CAS ruled in favor of PSG due to a technicality.

So PSG case has nothing in common with what City is accused of. And PSG didn't get fined or banned because UEFA was unable to find (or make) a reason for us to be out the boundaries of FFP rules.

 

[Metalartin]

Something very weird is going on.

Everyone who saw the new break earlier today saw it... it was either "sources close to the case" or "people familiar with the case"... Even City's legal team commented on it. I can't seem to find it in the tweets or the article.

Lets just hope someone had the sense to take a screenshot. As NYT/Tariq have gone into full on denial by the looks of it.

 

[avoidconfusion]

Asking again:

Has ANYONE taken a screenshot of the original NYT article before it was edited? Media claiming it was not edited (Stu Brennan getting flack for this). I am 100% sure I read the original version which contained a sentence around "sources familiar with the investigation" which is now gone!

 

[80s Shorts]

Sky News also reporting that according to 'sky sources' the UEFA panel investigating the financial allegations believe CFCBIC are going to recommend a 1 year ban. So are Sky just using the story from the NY Times or has news of the decision also been leaked to them?

What do you think ? Or can you ?

 

[King KdB of Belgium]

It is time to tell UEFA to get on with the investigation, and stop releasing bits of information to the press. If it is not UEFA, then it is upto them to find out who is leaking this information, and if they are working for UEFA they should be sacked forthwith. It would not surprise me if either one of the following clubs are not behind this, Man. Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea. As they will have to much to lose.

What beats me is how the rags who are losing money year in and year out are not up for an investigation.

 

[Fame Monster]

PSG has been sanctioned only one time and it was at the same time City got their similar sanctions.

Why would they ban PSG if PSG comply with the rules : they applied retroactive devaluations and PSG balanced the books by selling players accordingly. Thus, PSG is within the rules of FFP and cannot be punished.

The trick is that, even after PSG compliance, they tried to devaluate the sponsors further more. Since PSG couldn't sell any more players (the last market window for those 3 years was already over), it would have meant PSG would be punished despite their best efforts and cooperation. CAS ruled in favor of PSG due to a technicality.

So PSG case has nothing in common with what City is accused of. And PSG didn't get fined or banned because UEFA was unable to find (or make) a reason for us to be out the boundaries of FFP rules.

But PSG were adjudged to have been sponsored by a related party above fair market value. That seems to be the case here with the emails purportedly exposing Abu Dhabi's payment of the Etihad money. So why would City be banned when PSG were given a retroactive devaluation?