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

What do you think will be the outcome of the CAS hearing?

  • Two-year ban upheld

    Votes: 197 13.1%
  • Ban reduced to one year

    Votes: 422 28.2%
  • Ban overturned and City exonerated

    Votes: 815 54.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 65 4.3%

  • Total voters
    1,499
Status
Not open for further replies.
I assume that would have shown up on accounts or even bank transactions that City received. Therefore, I can only imagine the latter happened where ADUG transferred to Etihad. Whereupon Etihad sent the full quoted 67.5m. Otherwise City would have been absolute morons if the former of your scenarios would have happened, but then that would have surely been picked up without hacked emails. Then again if the leaks are the evidence, they hardly stand as legally obtained in a supreme court.

This is also from the leaked emails and seems to suggest the club are not idiots, and we only got paid by Etihad.

“I need to understand the mechanism by which additional sponsorship flows through ADUG. Ii [sic] it ADUG Shareholder->ADUG->Etihad->MCFC? Or is it rather ADUG Shareholder->Etihad->MCFC?,” Chumillas wrote.
Going by this, I don't see what grounds UEFA have to say ADUG or Mansour paid the money, because Chumillas clearly thinks Etihad are paying in both instances, and where Etihad get their money is none of their fucking business.

UEFA’s reason for the ban doesn’t make sense to me. The main allegation was always disguised owner funding regarding the Etihad deal. If they’re now saying it’s over-inflated sponsorships, then didn’t UEFA sign those off/re-adjust the values anyway at the time?

Disguised owner funding and over-inflated sponsorships are the same thing in this case. They're saying that we inflated the value of the Etihad deal by 57m because Etihad only paid 8m and Mansour secretly paid the rest.​

But how does that work... Isn't Leicester owned by King Power? You know the company that sponsors their stadium and shirts... many other examples of this too throughout football

Yeah but in theory King Power the company pay Leicester the sponsorship, not the Srivaddhanaprabha family even though one owns the other. If the Srivaddhanaprabhas were paying for the King Power sponsorship, that would be no bueno.
 
Stone has never been the brightest, apart from the top of his head, though, so not entirely surprising.
Stone could even be called as a witness in any later cases in the Swiss courts. That would wipe the smile off his face. He has more or less identified his source with that amateurish tweet. Why didn't he run the story yesterday if his source was a Senior Exec. He brings discredit on the BBC (if that's possible these days with their reputation) with his unprofessional behaviour. What a despicable piece of work he really is.
 
I am a lawyer and see these kind of conflicts everyday. I predict this decision to be overturned based on mala fide and incorrect reading of facts. Have hope fellow blues, Man City owners are one of the richest people on this planet and can hire the best team of lawyers to get their legal rights protected.
We will be playing Champions League next season. Stay together and support the club.
Well said, man.
 
yep, it looks like there will be the pressure of completely rewriting the history. Already writing about docking our points, soon there will be of taking our titles. Dirty Arabs took what's ours.
If you can't strip titles for killing 39 Italians, then I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be considered for failing to meet the shifting goalposts of an illegal protectionist scam
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.