Man City Appeal result at 9:30 BST

[FCBurnley]

Follow the money. Can’t imagine how much will have been sloshing around CAS

[Claret]

FFP rules are a nonsense. The biggest clubs are in favour of them because it helps protect their positions at the top. The wealthiest also seem able to find all the loopholes.

[Hendrickxz]

You can buy a fair few REoles watched for 10 mil!

[Down_Rover]

People can moan as much as they want, but City have convinced the highest sports court possible that they did not break the rules. And quite frankly, I didnt think there was going to be any other outcome. The rules are the problem, not the decision to follow them. UEFA are the problem here, not City

RU sure. The Court ruled there was insufficient evidence. That is poor preparation from UEFA if one was to be kind.

Non cooperation by a mere mortal is punished by a prison sentence. The rich simply have to empty their pockets of all their loose change

[Chester Perry]

So let's run this through - Man City have had this appeal turned over on technicalities of the process. Which is the only way an appeal can win - if you think that an appeal is a retrial you are mistaken, if the process was found to be solid then the ban would have been upheld. Those hoping for a moral judgement are sadly mistake as to the scope of the UEFA Adjudicatory Chamber and CAS

- The UEFA judgement failed because much of the charges and evidence fell outside UEFA's own 5 year period of bringing a case to judgement from the time the infringement occurred. This means that the charges and related evidence for them that were used to generate the ban was disqualified by CAS (if the UEFA window was 10 years or unlimited they would have stood),

- The evidence and charges that remained against City were such that it was not enough to validate the original judgement and therefore that had to be overturned. CAS did not say that evidence was factually incorrect, just that there was not enough left (within the time parameter) to make a compelling case

- CAS agreed with UEFA that Man City had been aggressively uncooperative throughout the process and that portion of the fine stood.

Man City will claim this as a victory because they believe the had a deal with Gianni Inafantino (then of UEFA) in relation to these charges and that should have been the end of it (I have posted much about the preference in the East to do deals rather than adhere to strict rules and judgements in the MMT thread over the years, and of that specific deal too). It is telling that Man City have never denied any of the claims, UEFA they believe are aggrieved because they didn't have all the information to hand when the deal was made, City regard that as part of negotiation and once a deal is struck it is final.

Consequently, this may not be the end of FFP as many are forecasting, rather an opportunity to close a few more loop-holes and an opportunity for UEFA to relax some of it's self-imposed constraints.

The truly ominous fact at play here is that City have possibly spent as much on legal advice and representation on this case as they will on the fine. They will fight the football authorities tooth and nail to pursue their course, which probably means that FIFA will do nothing to stop City Football Group and it's Disneyfication of football (lots about that on the MMT thread) and probably brings an end to the Premier Leagues own investigation into Man City's finances, unless they are not bound by similar constraints.

[Roosterbooster]

RU sure. The Court ruled there was insufficient evidence. That is poor preparation from UEFA if one was to be kind.

Non cooperation by a mere mortal is punished by a prison sentence. The rich simply have to empty their pockets of all their loose change

I'm not sure that many people would go to prison for lack of cooperation. In any case, this was a civil hearing so prison is not an option.

As for the rules and who broke them, CAS did not have the evidence to convict City. It was a complete failure of UEFA. Either their rules aren't watertight enough, or they arent able to use legal avenues to gather the evidence required. They wanted to make a point with City, and failed. Its completely backfired.

And at the end of it all, the only court to say City did anything wrong with regards to the rules are UEFA themselves. And they had a vested interest. The notion that "there isn't enough evidence to convict" means the court thought they were guilty but were unable to deliver that verdict isnt true either. This wasn't looking at that. They were being asked "is the original decision justified?". Their answer was no. Their response doesn't mean City aren't innocent

[Down_Rover]

I'm not sure that many people would go to prison for lack of cooperation. In any case, this was a civil hearing so prison is not an option.

As for the rules and who broke them, CAS did not have the evidence to convict City. It was a complete failure of UEFA. Either their rules aren't watertight enough, or they arent able to use legal avenues to gather the evidence required. They wanted to make a point with City, and failed. Its completely backfired.

And at the end of it all, the only court to say City did anything wrong with regards to the rules are UEFA themselves. And they had a vested interest. The notion that "there isn't enough evidence to convict" means the court thought they were guilty but were unable to deliver that verdict isnt true either. This wasn't looking at that. They were being asked "is the original decision justified?". Their answer was no. Their response doesn't mean City aren't innocent

Well you got there in the end, CAS did not say City aren't innocent.

For info, there is a code of conduct for civil hearings and a series of management hearings leading up to the main hearing. Non cooperation in these procedures can carry a penalty of a prison sentence. It is contempt of Court.

I agree it was a complete failure by Uefa. My question is why after all that time, and presumably having documented the rationale behind their original decision, they failed to present the right documents in Court. This is where the conspiracy theories begin

[Vegas Claret]

Arsenal, 15 year 90 million quid Emirates ground sponsorship
Man City, 10 year 400 Million quid Etihad ground sponsorship

seems legit

[Roosterbooster]

For info, there is a code of conduct for civil hearings and a series of management hearings leading up to the main hearing. Non cooperation in these procedures can carry a penalty of a prison sentence. It is contempt of Court.

But the lack of cooperation was with UEFA and not the court? So a prison sentance is not an option? Am I missing something?

[Cirrus_Minor]

If clubs get around fair play rules on these type of technicalities then there are no fair play rules and there will never be fair play.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Ultimately this decision was arrived at by 3 legal minds / arbiters (a Frenchman / Canadian, German and Portugese, all with vast experience). Then you get the legal teams from each side - I would hazard a guess that the power of the City legal team far surpasses that of the other side.

Very similar to, say, government prosecutions of top companies - the company often runs rings around the government in question, whether it be here, the US or wherever. None of it is a surprise, it turns the stomach, and it gradually kills football, but it was inevitable.

(it wouldn't annoy me so much if there wasn't some very obvious cases of dodginess going on all over the place which goes ignored, whether it is drug taking, fraud, money laundering etc. In that sense City may have a legit argument about being singled out, guilty or not, but that shouldn't of course affect whether they win a case like this).

[Hipper]

So let's run this through - Man City have had this appeal turned over on technicalities of the process. Which is the only way an appeal can win - if you think that an appeal is a retrial you are mistaken, if the process was found to be solid then the ban would have been upheld. Those hoping for a moral judgement are sadly mistake as to the scope of the UEFA Adjudicatory Chamber and CAS

- The UEFA judgement failed because much of the charges and evidence fell outside UEFA's own 5 year period of bringing a case to judgement from the time the infringement occurred. This means that the charges and related evidence for them that were used to generate the ban was disqualified by CAS (if the UEFA window was 10 years or unlimited they would have stood).

Is there a possibility that Man City's lack of co-operation meant the UEFA's inquiry took longer so taking it beyond the five year rule?

[Down_Rover]

But the lack of cooperation was with UEFA and not the court? So a prison sentance is not an option? Am I missing something?

Oh dear you don’t understand
Never mind won’t interrupt my sleeping patterns

[Chester Perry]

Is there a possibility that Man City's lack of co-operation meant the UEFA's inquiry took longer so taking it beyond the five year rule?

no - It is more that the Investigation process took too long after the Football leaks articles (not that they had that much time) - they were so focused on making a cast iron case and lost track of their own constraints - City told them that at the time, and it factored into their lack of co-operation. No one seems to doubt the City misdemeanours and I repeat City have never denied them (City also believe they have already been punished for them too), just UEFA killed themselves with their own constraints.

the most shocking thing here is this is the 2nd time that UEFA have fallen down the time limitations trap on virtually the same issue - remember PSG got UEFA to drop it's 2nd FFP case (similar charges) for time limitation reasons

Many of us suspected that PSG and City would use expensive lawyers o help them avoid them having to revisit previous investigations as a result of Football Leaks - well PSG have just done that at the Courts for Arbitration of Sport.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47632779" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

expect city to swiftly follow suit

[Spijed]

I know it'll never happen but wouldn't it be great if something like this led to Man City's downfall?

https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/man- ... eal-536963

[timshorts]

So, in summary if you have enough money Financial Fair Play doesn't matter

Well yes. That is the point of financial fair play. If your club is given £x without reservations of benefit or loan arrangements then the club has the money.

It's not the same as being given a load of money in consideration of a transfer of the ground and a lease back.
It's not the same as buying the club and then fixing the financing arrangements so that the club pays you to buy itself back.
It's also not the same as joining up with your biggest rival to fix the TV money so that the other clubs in the league get f all in comparison to you.

Hence I'm with City on this one. They have been targeted by the European cartel, on whose behalf these rules were imposed to keep themselves ever rich and those oiky upstarts like City, wolves, Newcastle, potentially us from challenging the elite - notwithstanding that city wolves Newcastle and us have a lot more history than, say, PSG.

[LordBob]

UEFA are no longer fit for purpose and haven't been for a long time, they detest English success in Europe. I posted some time ago about the corruption that led to deaths at Heysel stadium brought about by UEFA 'organisation' Liverpool, the holders were given the wrong end the end hastily patched up Liverpool fans were told they couldn't have more tickets yet they opened the Liverpool end to innocent Juventus fans the Liverpool fans were angry the stampede collapsed the shoddy wall and the rest is history. UEFA didn't envisage deaths but they wanted trouble and an excuse to ban ALL ENGLISH clubs for 5 years, I also stated I became interested in this event when while working in Belgium I became a friend of a guy whose brother in law was a police sergeant on duty that very night, UEFA don't like us.

[Zlatan]

And there was me thinking it was to ensure that clubs didn’t just spend as much as they wanted even if they had the money to help ensure the competition (as in the leagues) didn’t just end up being about who had the most money. Now, if you have the money you can legitimately buy the league. At least they all want to buy our league, so that keeps a little competition for some of them.

[ecc]

"UEFA don't like us."

That's why the UK has left the EU. Foreigners don't like us.

[fidelcastro]

"UEFA don't like us."

That's why the UK has left the EU. Foreigners don't like us.

Strange that. I have spoken to many people who voted to leave because they say they don't like foreigners.

[Spijed]

UEFA are no longer fit for purpose and haven't been for a long time, they detest English success in Europe. I posted some time ago about the corruption that led to deaths at Heysel stadium brought about by UEFA 'organisation' Liverpool, the holders were given the wrong end the end hastily patched up Liverpool fans were told they couldn't have more tickets yet they opened the Liverpool end to innocent Juventus fans the Liverpool fans were angry the stampede collapsed the shoddy wall and the rest is history. UEFA didn't envisage deaths but they wanted trouble and an excuse to ban ALL ENGLISH clubs for 5 years, I also stated I became interested in this event when while working in Belgium I became a friend of a guy whose brother in law was a police sergeant on duty that very night, UEFA don't like us.

Are you saying that Man city have been unfairly treated by UEFA?

[BenWickes]

There's a number of clubs who 'act outside the boundaries' in football. Barca, Real Madrid, PSG. At home. Take your pick. City (allegedly) Leicester, Wolves, Bournemouth, Villa, Everton. Probably more. There is a point in why UEFA chose City over Barca and PSG especially. Some major weird stuff goes on at those clubs.

[Spijed]

I hope everyone tells Pep Guardiola where to go.

They don't deserve an apology in any shape or form.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53403339

[AlargeClaret]

UEFA are no longer fit for purpose and haven't been for a long time, they detest English success in Europe. I posted some time ago about the corruption that led to deaths at Heysel stadium brought about by UEFA 'organisation' Liverpool, the holders were given the wrong end the end hastily patched up Liverpool fans were told they couldn't have more tickets yet they opened the Liverpool end to innocent Juventus fans the Liverpool fans were angry the stampede collapsed the shoddy wall and the rest is history. UEFA didn't envisage deaths but they wanted trouble and an excuse to ban ALL ENGLISH clubs for 5 years, I also stated I became interested in this event when while working in Belgium I became a friend of a guy whose brother in law was a police sergeant on duty that very night, UEFA don't like us.

While I don’t doubt the deep stinking corruption in UEFA ( and FIFA
“The Liverpool fans were angry”
I’ve heard some bullsh1t excuses but that takes the biscuit tbf. They charged the Juve fans with absolute violent intent which then lead to the crush and collapse .)

Any other gems ? was Hitler “just misunderstood” ? was the iceberg that hit the Titantic “ just out for a swim after a tough day at sea”...

[Wokingclaret]

Love Jose Mourinho's view

https://twitter.com/SkySportsNews/statu ... gr%5Etweet