UEFA FFP investigation - Other PL clubs appeal to CAS to prevent City playing in Europe (p 2581)

Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.

  1. Parisian

    Parisian

    Joined:
    18 Jan 2019
    Messages:
    934
    Team supported:
    Paris Saint Germain
    It can have an impact. City can show other clubs have done similar things and have not been investigated and punished. Why would they be punished then if the investigation is fair ?

    It was also the strategy of Milan AC during their first appeal and it effectively reduced the sanctions, albeit it can be argued that the change of ownership had a greater impact.
     
  2. nmc

    nmc

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2006
    Messages:
    13,589
    Location:
    Manchester
    Somethings been established by precedent but it’s certainly not competence.
     
  3. jaigurugoat

    jaigurugoat

    Joined:
    3 Mar 2011
    Messages:
    3,098
    They hadn't though, as the 2019 case was initiated after 5 years had passed from the start of the period within which the alleged breaches occurred.

    From reading Stefan Borson's piece on the 9320 blog this may be one of our strongest arguments. It's one thing to use illegally obtained e-mails but it's quite another to use them as a basis to support a time-barred investigation.
     
    BluechesterCity likes this.
  4. Prestwich_Blue

    Prestwich_Blue

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2006
    Messages:
    49,843
    Location:
    Wherever I lay my hat that's my home
    It wasn't considered because they didn't have time. They had to pass the case to the AC by 15th May, to avoud it being timed-out, as it would have been over 5 years ago and therefore outside their own limitation on reopening a case. They'd only opened the case a couple of months before.

    But there's a doubt as to whether that date was even the valid one, as it totally depends on when the breach actually occurred. If CAS decides it was before 16th May 2014 then they'll have been out of time and i assume the case will be dropped.
     
  5. sir baconface

    sir baconface

    Joined:
    20 May 2012
    Messages:
    15,530
    Location:
    Not in my lifetime.
    Interesting that, in the interests of balance, you didn’t quote the post that sparked it. Wasn’t it from a mod?

    But yeah, happy to move on. It’s of little consequence.
     
  6. Academica

    Academica

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2013
    Messages:
    955
    No he said that was the best we could hope for. In fact he said a one year ban was the best that City could hope for.
     
    karen7 likes this.
  7. cityzen81

    cityzen81

    Joined:
    1 May 2019
    Messages:
    204
    Im not sure if we ever submitted it to them. So much shit has gone on since then but I seem to recall they asked City for clarification on a few points but then pushed it upstairs to meet the deadline.
     
  8. BringBackSwales

    BringBackSwales

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    14,805
    No they should keep quiet and say nothing, until they announce their decision. That’s normal, not odd, fucking social media age
     
  9. BringBackSwales

    BringBackSwales

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    14,805
    Cheers, bad phraseology on my part
     
  10. Parisian

    Parisian

    Joined:
    18 Jan 2019
    Messages:
    934
    Team supported:
    Paris Saint Germain
    Did i say UEFA is right ?

    I said those email are obviously the basis of their argument. Before said email leaks, UEFA had "no problem" with City. It is CAS job to judge if the evidence given by UEFA are admissible or not. Not mine.

    Here, we are discussing UEFA decision and what has led them to this decision.
     

Share This Page