Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
uppsala

Man City FFP decision this month.

Recommended Posts

There was plenty of encouragement on BM for anyone encountering Conn to give him a hiding.

Jesus. I'm pretty sure Conn is actually a City fan too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got any idea what appeal avenues are open to City. Obviously it's CAS in the first instance but then I've seen various things like Swiss federal court or the European Supreme Court if that were to fail.

 

The FFP rules effectively exclude all routes apart from CAS which is itself an independent arbitration body. Appeals against arbitration awards (which is what the CAS decision will be) are deliberately limited as the object of the arbitration is to bring finality to the issue. You normally can only challenge the award on the basis that the arbitrators have breached the terms of the arbitration agreement rather than simply got the decision legally wrong (as is the case in appeals from judicial decisions). I suspect that as CAS is established in Switzerland, the Swiss Courts will have the potential jurisdiction to review the CAS decision. There is also in theory a possible route via the ECHR based upon alleged infringement of Article 6 rights (as in the Ali Riza case decided recently) but the difficulty with the ECHR is that its jurisdiction does not provide City with the remedies it will need if CAS reject their appeal and uphold the UEFA ban.

 

The biggest problem for City seems to be the 2014 settlement they reached with the same body that they are now accusing of being unlawful. That settlement was reached after their accounts showed that they had made losses in previous seasons that exceeded the 45 million that the owners could put in. The argument between UEFA and City appears to have centred upon adjustments that were made to City's submission on the basis that sponsorship deals were with related parties. As I recall City disputed that they were not entitled to discount deals merely because the sponsor was connected to Sheik Mansoor through board membership and claimed that they were entitled to include the amounts actually received as revenue from sponsors. The Eithad deal was not the main issue as it was assumed that Eithad were paying the 67.5 million and there was no obvious link to Sheik Mansoor.  The settlement effectively required City to accept the legitimacy of the FFP rules and given that compliance with the rules (which sets out the procedure for investigation and adjudication as well as the appeal to CAS) is also a condition of entry to UEFA competitions, it is difficult to see how CAS can effectively overrule the decision other than on an application of the FFP rules. If City misled the IC in 2014 in respect of the Eithad sponsorship by including it in their submission at the full 67.5 million when Eithad were only paying 8 million and the balance was coming from an undisclosed source this probably allowed the AC to punish City for their original breaches as the 2014 settlement could then be set aside. This is my reading of the issue based upon the limited amount of information in the public domain. The reasoning of the AC will not become public until either the time for appealing has expired and City do not appeal (unlikely) or City's appeal is determined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was confirmed before the end of the season there would be poetic justice in having him hand over the trophy to Hendo v Chelsea

That would be the woolest thing ever.

Why have we never gone mainstream? What can we do to make it happen?

Bring back fyds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the woolest thing ever.

 

 

Haha, since Hyypia and fowler shared the lifting of the trophy with Redknapp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus. I'm pretty sure Conn is actually a City fan too.

He is. From childhood. Not sure if his support has endured during the oil years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raoul

So city might focus on the “legality” of the submission on which the ruling rests, essentially arguing that the leaked emails are themselves inadmissible and in using them, the judgement breaks the procedural rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FFP rules effectively exclude all routes apart from CAS which is itself an independent arbitration body. Appeals against arbitration awards (which is what the CAS decision will be) are deliberately limited as the object of the arbitration is to bring finality to the issue. You normally can only challenge the award on the basis that the arbitrators have breached the terms of the arbitration agreement rather than simply got the decision legally wrong (as is the case in appeals from judicial decisions). I suspect that as CAS is established in Switzerland, the Swiss Courts will have the potential jurisdiction to review the CAS decision. There is also in theory a possible route via the ECHR based upon alleged infringement of Article 6 rights (as in the Ali Riza case decided recently) but the difficulty with the ECHR is that its jurisdiction does not provide City with the remedies it will need if CAS reject their appeal and uphold the UEFA ban.

 

The biggest problem for City seems to be the 2014 settlement they reached with the same body that they are now accusing of being unlawful. That settlement was reached after their accounts showed that they had made losses in previous seasons that exceeded the 45 million that the owners could put in. The argument between UEFA and City appears to have centred upon adjustments that were made to City's submission on the basis that sponsorship deals were with related parties. As I recall City disputed that they were not entitled to discount deals merely because the sponsor was connected to Sheik Mansoor through board membership and claimed that they were entitled to include the amounts actually received as revenue from sponsors. The Eithad deal was not the main issue as it was assumed that Eithad were paying the 67.5 million and there was no obvious link to Sheik Mansoor.  The settlement effectively required City to accept the legitimacy of the FFP rules and given that compliance with the rules (which sets out the procedure for investigation and adjudication as well as the appeal to CAS) is also a condition of entry to UEFA competitions, it is difficult to see how CAS can effectively overrule the decision other than on an application of the FFP rules. If City misled the IC in 2014 in respect of the Eithad sponsorship by including it in their submission at the full 67.5 million when Eithad were only paying 8 million and the balance was coming from an undisclosed source this probably allowed the AC to punish City for their original breaches as the 2014 settlement could then be set aside. This is my reading of the issue based upon the limited amount of information in the public domain. The reasoning of the AC will not become public until either the time for appealing has expired and City do not appeal (unlikely) or City's appeal is determined.

Cheers Raoul - much appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bluemoon seems to be going mainstream now. Loads on twitter etc calling it out for being insane.

There is a 151 page thread about Liverpool hacking their computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a 151 page thread about Liverpool hacking their computers.

Hacking completely the wrong word. They did not disable the access to employees who departed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hacking completely the wrong word. They did not disable the access to employees who departed.

 

Sounds like they are a bunch of incompetent f***ers over at City

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hacking completely the wrong word. They did not disable the access to employees who departed.

 

Haha, imagine cracking encryption so sophisticated.

I get that there are laws about intellectual property, and even salespeople aren’t supposed to use leads at their next company, but everyone does to an extent, and it’s part of the game.

 

If city fans are so upset then why aren’t they annoyed at their 400 best lawyers in the world who settled for £1mm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, psl said:

Sterling pretty openly flirting with Real just before they play them is about right.

The picture of him on AS is unbelievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he does look almost gladiatorial, changing his city shirt to the "....mighty and massive and everyone knows it when they see it.." white madrid shirt. Of course he'll stay at city whilst he has to *cough* (summer at the latest)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course the BBC reporting of such shameful encouragement of approach, will be spun as part of some wider UEFA consiracy to undermine city, poor old "razzer" is a pawn being used at the whim of those who hate city and their right to exist....😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, stressederic said:

The picture of him on AS is unbelievable.

Quite stunning. We as a fan base would be up in arms. City's don't seem bothered. So you wonder if we care more or conversely take things to heart too much. Or if City are smarter in that they accept it's a personal career choice or conversely that all players are cash whores & that's what has helped get them where they are. 

But it helps cement Sterling's d*ckheadedness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...