Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros

SuperiorXI

Full Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Messages
5,596
Location
Manchester, England
Well if they appeal this (which they have), the ban will be postponed until the outcome of the hearing. I was also reading that City can then try and delay it. That's a lot of work to be done by may.
Will it? Where is that written?
 

BusbyMalone

First Man Falling
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,747
Thought they said it would be dealt with in time so clubs know where they stand?
Well it should be, imo. But as i said to the poster above, the ban will probably be postponed until the outcome of the hearing and then i was reading that City could try and delay it. It really should be sorted out by May as it affects other clubs aside from City, but i wouldn't hold my breath on it
 

BusbyMalone

First Man Falling
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,747
Will it? Where is that written?
An article Laurie Whitwell wrote in The Athletic with the help of a sports lawyer who has experience in these sorts of things.


Doesn't mean to say this will happen, of course. This is just his opinion, but it's a possibility. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
 
Last edited:

Rozay

Master of Hindsight
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
16,617
Location
#SmallingPlusOne
Well if they appeal this (which they have), the ban will be postponed until the outcome of the hearing. I was also reading that City can then try and delay it. That's a lot of work to be done by may.
I’m aware of the concept. Just because City have appealed, in February, is no reason to say ‘right, that’s it, 5th doesn’t matter’. CAS will rule long before the CL commences.
 

BusbyMalone

First Man Falling
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,747
I’m aware of the concept. Just because City have appealed, in February, is no reason to say ‘right, that’s it, 5th doesn’t matter’. CAS will rule long before the CL commences.
Then why ask me...

See my post above. It's of the opinion of someone who knows more about this than you or I. That's not to say he's right and this will happen, but it also wouldn't be a surprise to see this still unresolved by the end of the season. I hope they do sort it by then, i was just going by what was said by him and the article. It could drag on a little longer than expected.
 

Mihai

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2013
Messages
3,150
Uefa must have some pretty strong evidence to go for two years otherwise the backlash they could face is just mind boggling. And yet City claim no wrong doing. Something just doesn't add up.
Well, yeah, that is the reason of the ban.
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
6,845
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
An article Laurie Whitwell wrote in The Athletic with the help of a sports lawyer who has experience in these sorts of things, said something about it.


Doesn't mean to say this will happen, of course. This is just his opinion, but it's a possibility. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
CAS will definitely delay the ban if they think City’s case has any credibility. If they don’t that would be a damning indictment of how they view the strength of City’s appeal. Not to say a delay means they lean towards siding with City at all, just means they accept there’s enough substance there to possibly challenge UEFA’s verdict.
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
19,767
Location
Chester
CAS will delay the ban if they think City’s case has any credibility. If they don’t that would be a damning indictment of how they view the strength of City’s appeal. Not to say a delay means they lean towards siding with City at all, just means they accept there’s enough substance there to possibly challenge UEFA’s verdict.
Do City have a strong enough case to make the appeal worthwhile?

They deny breaching FFP regulations, obviously, but any evidence they have supporting their case would have to be irrefutable to change the original verdict. I can't see that being the case myself.
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
6,845
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
Do City have a strong enough case to make the appeal worthwhile?

They deny breaching FFP regulations, obviously, but any evidence they have supporting their case would have to be irrefutable to change the original verdict. I can't see that being the case myself.
We’ll have to find out. But surely the need for ‘irrefutable’ evidence works both ways; you’re talking as if UEFA’s case automatically assumes that same quality. And the case involves more than simply the disputing the evidence at hand i.e. the Der Spiegel leaks. For instance, as a hypothetical example City may well be guilty of what UEFA say, but that does not mean the investigation was conducted fairly.
 

VintageWhatnots

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Messages
371
Location
Greater Manchester
We’ll have to find out. But surely the need for ‘irrefutable’ evidence works both ways; you’re talking as if UEFA’s case automatically assumes that same quality. And the case involves more than simply the disputing the evidence at hand i.e. the Der Spiegel leaks. For instance, as a hypothetical example City may well be guilty of what UEFA say, but that does not mean the investigation was conducted fairly.
Genuine question, does it have to be?

UEFA and CAS aren't courts of law as such. CAS exists to ensure UEFA (and other sporting bodies) follow their own rules.

Do the same procedures as in a law case apply?

Or is it enough for UEFA to say, you broke our rules, it doesn't matter how we know, so this is your punishment. If that is the case then CAS is only checking that A) City did break the rules and B) the punishment is within the prescribed boundaries UEFA set out.
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
6,845
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
Genuine question, does it have to be?

UEFA and CAS aren't courts of law as such. CAS exists to ensure UEFA (and other sporting bodies) follow their own rules.

Do the same procedures as in a law case apply?

Or is it enough for UEFA to say, you broke our rules, it doesn't matter how we know, so this is your punishment. If that is the case then CAS is only checking that A) City did break the rules and B) the punishment is within the prescribed boundaries UEFA set out.
Not sure about that. I’d guess you’re right that generally matters do not require the same burden of proof as in a court of law (although this could well be where the case ends up) but UEFA would still have to be able to defend their evidence and how they reached their judgement. You can’t see the CAS upholding such a strong punishment if they are unsatisfied with UEFA’s case, which is why I contested the claim the onus is necessarily on City alone to provide irrefutable evidence.

Everything’s still quite vague right now so hopefully the appeal makes more details public.
 

VintageWhatnots

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Messages
371
Location
Greater Manchester
Not sure about that. I’d guess you’re right that generally matters do not require the same burden of proof as in a court of law (although this could well be where the case ends up) but UEFA would still have to be able to defend their evidence and how they reached their judgement. You can’t see the CAS upholding such a strong punishment if they are unsatisfied with UEFA’s case, which is why I contested the claim the onus is necessarily on City alone to provide irrefutable evidence.

Everything’s still quite vague right now so hopefully the appeal makes more details public.
Yes, they'll certainly need to have some level of proof
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
27,347
Location
xG Zombie Nation
Not sure about that. I’d guess you’re right that generally matters do not require the same burden of proof as in a court of law (although this could well be where the case ends up) but UEFA would still have to be able to defend their evidence and how they reached their judgement. You can’t see the CAS upholding such a strong punishment if they are unsatisfied with UEFA’s case, which is why I contested the claim the onus is necessarily on City alone to provide irrefutable evidence.

Everything’s still quite vague right now so hopefully the appeal makes more details public.
I thought that City were going after judgement on a procedural level. I was under the impression that they're not even going to deny that they broke the rules.
 

BobbyManc

Full Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
6,845
Location
The Wall
Supports
Man City
I thought that City were going after judgement on a procedural level. I was under the impression that they're not even going to deny that they broke the rules.
Nope I think it’s everything, from procedure to denying they broke the rules. The language has been unequivocal in denying they broke the rules. It’s worth remembering UEFA have been criticised a couple of times before by independent courts if I recall correctly about the wording/vagueness of their FFP rules before, so I’d guess City’s defence will try and exploit that aspect.
 

elmo

Can never have too many Eevees
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
7,482
Location
AKA: Slapanut Goat Smuggla
Just get 4th.

We'll get fecked over if we try to depend on external help as is tradition.
 

Jeppers7

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
1,524
Nope I think it’s everything, from procedure to denying they broke the rules. The language has been unequivocal in denying they broke the rules. It’s worth remembering UEFA have been criticised a couple of times before by independent courts if I recall correctly about the wording/vagueness of their FFP rules before, so I’d guess City’s defence will try and exploit that aspect.
hilarious if city claim to have not broken the rules:lol:
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
Genuine question, does it have to be?

UEFA and CAS aren't courts of law as such. CAS exists to ensure UEFA (and other sporting bodies) follow their own rules.

Do the same procedures as in a law case apply?

Or is it enough for UEFA to say, you broke our rules, it doesn't matter how we know, so this is your punishment. If that is the case then CAS is only checking that A) City did break the rules and B) the punishment is within the prescribed boundaries UEFA set out.
CAS have already told City the way that the Uefa's leaks of the case as it was going on was "worrisome" when they dismissed City approaching them the first time because Uefa hadn't reached a verdict. City are going to try and get this dismissed on a technicality I think. That's why they are saying UEFA were leaking info and had already called the result before the case began. CAS seems to think there is merit in that, so I think unless UEFA have to have clear proof outside of the hacked/stolen documents or City will be getting off on a technicality.

Basically it seems our defence is going to be "witch hunt with no legal proof to confirm the accusations". Down to CAS to decide whether that stands, if they back UEFA it will go to Switzerland but I'd imagine with us missing the CL and likely suing UEFA for compensation if Swiss courts side with City.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
5,087
Irrespective of City’s absolutely guilty case....

I think a system that sees a staged percentage FFP ‘Failure’ year on year would help the sport. Just across a 3 year period.

If the fit and proper person test was a robust test rather than a cursory smile and wave, obviously.

If a Billionaire wants to buy Newcastle and invest £250m a year for three years... great.

The current rules are shite. So shite that it’s better to break them and pay the cost, rather than work within them.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
Irrespective of City’s absolutely guilty case....

I think a system that sees a staged percentage FFP ‘Failure’ year on year would help the sport. Just across a 3 year period.

If the fit and proper person test was a robust test rather than a cursory smile and wave, obviously.

If a Billionaire wants to buy Newcastle and invest £250m a year for three years... great.

The current rules are shite. So shite that it’s better to break them and pay the cost, rather than work within them.
Honestly the best and fairest solution to me is wage cap and transfer cap. Set it somewhat reasonable like 200k per week and 150m budget per season. That way owners like Cities, PSG's etc.. can come in and join the big clubs but not financially bully them. The big clubs can still attract the best players without the sugar daddy clubs dwarfing them and outside investment can see a Newcastle, Villa or Everton rise to compete.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
5,087
Honestly the best and fairest solution to me is wage cap and transfer cap. Set it somewhat reasonable like 200k per week and 150m budget per season. That way owners like Cities, PSG's etc.. can come in and join the big clubs but not financially bully them. The big clubs can still attract the best players without the sugar daddy clubs dwarfing them and outside investment can see a Newcastle, Villa or Everton rise to compete.
You can’t honestly advocate capping a players salary? All that does is benefit the owners. Fcuk the insanely wealthy. Be that personal fortunes or Corporations.

I think a staged purchase policy would work. No FFP for Year one. Year 2 is loosely tied to revenue. Year 3 less so. All the way through for each year across a decade. A sliding scale.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
You can’t honestly advocate capping a players salary? All that does is benefit the owners. Fcuk the insanely wealthy. Be that personal fortunes or Corporations.

I think a staged purchase policy would work. No FFP for Year one. Year 2 is loosely tied to revenue. Year 3 less so. All the way through for each year across a decade. A sliding scale.
I think I do. And in fairness I've set it pretty high, the problem with a salary cap though is obviously different tax bands and rates in different countries. Staged FFP is quite interesting too though but would likely be hard to implement.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
5,087
I think I do. And in fairness I've set it pretty high, the problem with a salary cap though is obviously different tax bands and rates in different countries. Staged FFP is quite interesting too though but would likely be hard to implement.
Staged FFP would take about 30 minutes to draw up. There’s no difficulty.

Fair go if you support a Salary Cap. It sure as shit would need to be closer to £500k a week than £150k though.

Messi is quite comfortably worth 5 times the average player. Every team on the planet would take him for double the salary of their best player. Immediately. You can’t limit his earnings, or punish a whole squad, because of his brilliance.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
Staged FFP would take about 30 minutes to draw up. There’s no difficulty.

Fair go if you support a Salary Cap. It sure as shit would need to be closer to £500k a week than £150k though.

Messi is quite comfortably worth 5 times the average player. Every team on the planet would take him for double the salary of their best player. Immediately. You can’t limit his earnings, or punish a whole squad, because of his brilliance.
Thats a good point too. Its hard to justify Messi being on the same money as say Sterling or Pogba etc.. Now I think about it, I probably lean more towards staged ffp too.
 

terraloo

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
41
Supports
Chelsea
Well if they appeal this (which they have), the ban will be postponed until the outcome of the hearing. I was also reading that City can then try and delay it. That's a lot of work to be done by may.
Not correct.

An appeal to CAS doesn’t automatically delay the ban for that to happen a separate application has to be made and agreed byCAS. In reality any such application is almost certain to be agreed.
 

SER19

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
7,991
If they win it and the ban is upheld surely its proof they shouldn't even be in it this year? I'd be livid to be a team knocked out by a side getting where they are by cheating.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
If they win it and the ban is upheld surely its proof they shouldn't even be in it this year? I'd be livid to be a team knocked out by a side getting where they are by cheating.
The punishment is related to 2013-16 I think, so its for those seasons. I have no clue why its those seasons in particular just that it is. Basically its that we lied to Uefa back then which obviously played a big part in us assembling the team we have now. But we're not being investigated post 2016 or at least haven't been found in breach of anything since (yet?).
 

BusbyMalone

First Man Falling
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
4,747
Not correct.

An appeal to CAS doesn’t automatically delay the ban for that to happen a separate application has to be made and agreed byCAS. In reality any such application is almost certain to be agreed.
Not according to a Lawyer who has experience in this. He expects CAS to postpone the ban until the outcome of the hearing.
 

yumtum

DUX' bumchum
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
4,663
Location
Wales
Honestly the best and fairest solution to me is wage cap and transfer cap. Set it somewhat reasonable like 200k per week and 150m.
Isn't it common knowledge that you guys paid Mancini twice? I'm sure your club will try and break the rules regardless of what rules are in place.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
Can City file a lawsuit against UEFA in Swiss court?
Yup I believe if City lose with CAS they can go to the swiss federal court and finally European Court of Humans Rights (ironic given the man who owns our club).
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
Isn't it common knowledge that you guys paid Mancini twice? I'm sure your club will try and break the rules regardless of what rules are in place.
Mancini was paid two different wages for two different jobs.

He was the best advisor Al Jazira ever had and well worth that £1.75m per year.
 

ExecutionerWasp001

Full Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
280
If they were to win the CL this season & then had the UEFA sanctions upheld by CAS surely they would have the CL Title stripped. They are being investigated over an earlier time frame. It is these earlier infringements though that have enabled them to get to the point they are now at.
 

SER19

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
7,991
The punishment is related to 2013-16 I think, so its for those seasons. I have no clue why its those seasons in particular just that it is. Basically its that we lied to Uefa back then which obviously played a big part in us assembling the team we have now. But we're not being investigated post 2016 or at least haven't been found in breach of anything since (yet?).
But they cheated and are getting banned. The only reason they're in it this year is the cheating wasn't detected sooner. Its absurd that a team being banned for cheating can potentially win the competition they're being banned from cheating to compete in.
 

SER19

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
7,991
If they were to win the CL this season & then had the UEFA sanctions upheld by CAS surely they would have the CL Title stripped. They are being investigated over an earlier time frame. It is these earlier infringements though that have enabled them to get to the point they are now at.
It would have to be. I'd be livid to lose a final to them then see them banned for cheating.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
6,561
Supports
Man City
But they cheated and are getting banned. The only reason they're in it this year is the cheating wasn't detected sooner. Its absurd that a team being banned for cheating can potentially win the competition they're being banned from cheating to compete in.
It's stupid but its Uefa doing Uefa things...