Lawyers gonna lawyer and if the city owners think there is a chance I could see them throwing millions and millions into lawyering up ... I think as a mimimum it is a headache uefa would rather avoidEven so, technically, Man City are currently not based in a region that is within the EU either. If they were to adjudicate in such a manner, then it would open up a legal minefield for the court themselves as it would be a retrospective decision which would have no current locus, which is a pretty big paradox
Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
The Premier League will open up their own investigation if this gets through.
To be fair you spent years on here justifying Citys bullshit deals so lets just say there could be a legal minefield.
Didn't City sign agreement that they will comply with FFP? I don't know how they can challenge FFP itself when they have agreed and signed deal with UEFA, even few years back you paid huge fine for breaking the rule.
If clubs had problems with FFP, then PSG and City would have challenged that rule long back.
I'm not sure why anyone would think otherwise, just cause you're a private entity doesn't mean you can make up any rule you want
Yep. Which is exactly why I've been saying this CAS case does not, as far as I can see, have anything to do with FFP as a system itself. It will come down to technicalities and the reality of City's sponsorship deals, not whether FFP complies with EU law.
They made a new rule just a year ago where they gave free pass to all top 4 league teams, directly to group stages. It's a invite competition and they can set any rules as an entry criteria.
Surely will follow the same suite as every appeal ever lodged and result in a compromise where the ban is halved?
So why haven't UEFA just kicked City out? Why bother with CAS at all, just kick City out and say see you in two years. The answer, obviously, is they are not allowed to set any rules as an entry criteria. Or this thread wouldn't exist.
It's the league that gets invited, not the clubs
Didn't they literally set the entry criteria where they gave free pass to all top 4 leagues, which means some other league has missed out direct entry to group stage or later qualifying stage?
They have kicked out City, but City challenged the ban in CAS. So yes, they have done it already, just that city have challenged the ban.
Recently AC Milan were banned from European competition, few other clubs were banned from European competitions for various reasons
https://www.90min.com/posts/6557684...ropean-competition-what-happened-to-them-next
https://khelnow.com/football/uefa-5-time-clubs-banned-europe
You can't have a rule that violates EU regulations, is my point.
I don't get how you can hold the belief that UEFA can set any entry criteria they want and invite or dis-invite clubs as they wish, yet also acknowledge that City are challenging UEFA's decision at an independent body. There's nothing to contest if your first belief is true, as UEFA can do what they want and City should have no recourse to seek redress via an independent body once UEFA decide to ban the club. This case isn't even about this, but the wider point is clearly true that UEFA do have wider guidelines that they have to take into account.
So are UEFA complying with EU rules? If they are not, then why did they ban AC MIlan and other clubs for violating FFP rules?
If they can't change the rule, then how did they change the entry criteria for other clubs by giving direct entry for top 4 leagues?
Of course there will be technicalities on which clubs will appeal, but UEFA sets their rule just like how FA's sets the rules for the domestic competitions.
Fair enough, I was wondering which EU regulations did they violate as FFP was in force for years and few clubs are already banned for not complying with it.
Yes, UEFA are complying with EU rules, no one is saying the opposite. In fact, that's exactly what I'm arguing. You seem to be denying that they have to comply with EU rules (within reason, as I said there is elasticity for sporting competitions). Of course UEFA are able to determine the entry criteria as they see fit, the point is any decision would be open to legal challenge which you seem to think is not the case, as UEFA do have to comply with a wider body of guidelines and regulations. Otherwise, to use an extreme example, they could only invite leagues/clubs who field white European players if they wanted. Yeah, they could do that, but they'd get annihilated in court.
Well there is a clear miscommunication then, i thought you meant FFP violates EU regulations and also that UEFA can't set new rules as entry criteria.
My point was FFP doesn't violate any regulations as clubs all agreed to it and few clubs have already banned for not complying with it. Also that UEFA can set new rules as they have already done it, obviously complying with EU regulations.
i talk about epl league if man city is weak mean liverpool will retain epl titles next season is very bad news for man utd
Every decision like that needs one year notice. So even if UEFA does that (for which is zero chance) it can't apply for next season.
Are these dirty cheating bastards going to get away with this? Whats the consensus on here?
Pep seems very confident
If they are banned it will give pep a good excuse to leave and say the club lied to him and the players.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If they are banned it will give pep a good excuse to leave and say the club lied to him and the players.
In all honesty, there's nothing else he can say.
He can't really say that our legal defense was crap and hence it won't get overturned.
He can't really say that our legal defense was crap and hence it won't get overturned.
Sickening if they don't get banned.
could see him bugger off to PSG and take KDB and Silva with him
Neymar...Iccardi...Mbappe
............KDB......Silva.........
................Verattti...............
If they are there you might as well scrap FFP.
Crime pays.
I think they are going to get away with it and no ban.
Saying I trust the club is one thing but the last 2 or 3 times he has sounded overly confident about city's chances of playing in CL. Maybe he and city know something that we don't.
People wouldn't commit it if it didn't.
Nah, I think its PR nothing more.
That said Uefa have a terrible record when it comes to CAS losing almost all their big cases so who knows.
Let's scrap it then
Im surprised to see Pep stay at city this long. He seems like the type of manager that doesnt do long term roles. Maybe he is happy at city and will stay for a while?
I actually think that them being banned for 2 years was designed in a way for the ban to reduced to one on appeal. Same thing happens with transfer bans as well. It will be shocking if a ban is completely cancelled. This will set a dangerous precedent.
Your lot still wouldn't spend.Let's scrap it then
City are more run like an English club in terms of heirachy than Bayern and Bacra. There's no egotistical elected presidents or supercilious group of ex-players above him in the food chain. Rather, they go out of their way to blow smoke up his arse and massage his ego. They even bought his brother a La Liga football club
He chats a lot of shit to the media to be fair. He always says he will defend his players even if they're shit and he's just doing the same about the club right now.
Of course City know stuff we do not. It’s highly likely City have been made aware of the result over the past day or so, and by extension Pep. I cannot see the logic in telling Pep to keep up the bravado if they know they’ve lost, it would just make it more embarrassing come the official announcement. I think his quotes today are the biggest indication City either know for a fact or remain very confident in success at CAS.
Deffo staying until 2021, even without CL. His new assistant has option until '22 so I think there's decent chance Pep could sign another extension.
I can see them getting a hefty fine and that‘s it.