Match Day Thread General matchday thread.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Tobes said:
They’ll be in the CL next season. They’ll either win the appeal before the summer, or the appeal will drag on, and UEFA will suspend the penalty until it’s completed.
Click to expand...
The impression i had was that CAS doesn't normally take too long to make a decision once they are dealing with a case . I'm not so convinced as others that City will win it all depends if EUFA have correctly followed their procedures and the punishment fits the crime again according to their regs.
CAS are more for looking at decisions made by sporting bodies and have they followed the laid down procedures the fly in the ointment in this case is the illegally obtained internal e-mails and how they view them .
 
Solid_Air 2 said:
The impression i had was that CAS doesn't normally take too long to make a decision once they are dealing with a case . I'm not so convinced as others that City will win it all depends if EUFA have correctly followed their procedures and the punishment fits the crime again according to their regs.
CAS are more for looking at decisions made by sporting bodies and have they followed the laid down procedures the fly in the ointment in this case is the illegally obtained internal e-mails and how they view them .
Click to expand...
The hacked emails source is a Portuguese fella who’s currently on remand for over 100 hacking offences.

Illegally obtained data would be almost certainly be deemed inadmissible in a court of law, and so I’ll be amazed if it’s deemed to be acceptable in this case.

As for the timescale, it’ll depend on the evidence provided and it’s level of complexity. Mansour will throw the kitchen sink at this imho. Faced with this and the threat of a counter claim by City for reputational damage to City’s brand by UEFA, they’ll crumple like a cheap suit imo. This could effectively kill FFP as a genuine deterrent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luvgonzo
Tobes said:
The hacked emails source is a Portuguese fella who’s currently on remand for over 100 hacking offences.

Illegally obtained data would be almost certainly be deemed inadmissible in a court of law, and so I’ll be amazed if it’s deemed to be acceptable in this case.

As for the timescale, it’ll depend on the evidence provided and it’s level of complexity. Mansour will throw the kitchen sink at this imho. Faced with this and the threat of a counter claim by City for reputational damage to City’s brand by UEFA, they’ll crumple like a cheap suit imo. This could effectively kill FFP as a genuine deterrent.
Click to expand...
you don't use the e-mails you just use the publicly available info to ask the right questions <whistle>
Thing is it is no longer in EUFA's hands but in the hands of CAS so if they uphold the decision UEFA will have to stand by it or destroy their own disciplinary procedures .
 
Solid_Air 2 said:
you don't use the e-mails you just use the publicly available info to ask the right questions <whistle>
Thing is it is no longer in EUFA's hands but in the hands of CAS so if they uphold the decision UEFA will have to stand by it or destroy their own disciplinary procedures .
Click to expand...
IF City were daft enough not to ensure that the actual payment came directly from Etihad even if Mansour was the actual original source, then they may well have an issue, irrespective of the stolen data.

If they have been that cavalier then I’d be amazed. If they haven’t, then the entire case is based on stolen evidence that they’ll rightly claim should be inadmissible.
 
Tobes said:
IF City were daft enough not to ensure that the actual payment came directly from Etihad even if Mansour was the actual original source, then they may well have an issue, irrespective of the stolen data.

If they have been that cavalier then I’d be amazed. If they haven’t, then the entire case is based on stolen evidence that they’ll rightly claim should be inadmissible.
Click to expand...
apparently they were that cavalier :1980_boogie_down:
 
Solid_Air 2 said:
apparently they were that cavalier :1980_boogie_down:
Click to expand...

That’s not my understanding of why they’ve been found guilty by UEFA. What they failed to do, was produce evidence that was irrefutable in relation to the stolen emails i.e. email replies that refuted the suggestion that the bulk of the actual sponsorship cash was coming from Mansours company as opposed to Etihad.

If Etihad actually paid the invoice then it ends there imo.
 
Tobes said:
That’s not my understanding of why they’ve been found guilty by UEFA. What they failed to do, was produce evidence that was irrefutable in relation to the stolen emails i.e. email replies that refuted the suggestion that the bulk of the actual sponsorship cash was coming from Mansours company as opposed to Etihad.

If Etihad actually paid the invoice then it ends there imo.
Click to expand...
We wont know till CAS rule on the case but i'm slightly more optimistic than you.Though as i said earlier i think CAS are more about the legal procedures than the nitty gritty of the case .
 
Rorschach said:
That £30 million for an "option" on naming rights are looking dodgy at the moment eh @Tobes?
Click to expand...
Not as dodgy as the £12m a season to sponsor Finch Farm mate.

But....as long as the money comes directly from USM then they can go **** themselves.

Yours Sincerely

Big Uzzie
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rorschach
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back