**THE TRUTH THAT NOBODY CAN HANDLE RE: CITY'S CAS VERDICT - A THREAD**
First off the bat - and it's astonishing that this even needs to be said at all - courts do in fact require a level of proof in support of allegations to be able to dish out sanctions in relation to them.
First off the bat - and it's astonishing that this even needs to be said at all - courts do in fact require a level of proof in support of allegations to be able to dish out sanctions in relation to them.
City wanted said standard of proof to be "beyond reasonable doubt", an especially high burden, but CAS rejected this and sided with UEFA's assertion of "comfortable satisfaction".
This is a LOWER burden of proof, yet UEFA's 'evidence' still did not meet it. Let that sink in.
This is a LOWER burden of proof, yet UEFA's 'evidence' still did not meet it. Let that sink in.
The reason for that, simply, is because they had barely any evidence at all. And indeed what little evidence they DID have was solely what was already in the public domain - illegally obtained emails, taken out of context and with a little doctoring thrown in for good measure.
Out of 5,500,000 hacked emails, Der Spiegel could only turn 6 of them into something that vaguely resembled evidence. Just six.
I mean, can you imagine how many desperate days, weeks, even months that Der Spiegel spent trawling through them? So they got giddy over 6 emails.
I mean, can you imagine how many desperate days, weeks, even months that Der Spiegel spent trawling through them? So they got giddy over 6 emails.
They were making serious allegations based on nothing but "innuendo" in CAS's own words, with nothing at all to suggest that the discussions in the emails were executed in the way that they hoped they were, if at all.
No link was established between HHSM and/or ADUG and Etihad.
No link was established between HHSM and/or ADUG and Etihad.
Der Spiegel and UEFA were particularly excited at the mention of "His Highness" providing "alternative sources". They of course decided this was Sheikh Mansour, but guess what… it turns out it was HH Sheikh Sultan Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, the then Chairman of ADTA.
The "alternative sources" to be provided by ADTA were government grants for organisations in Abu Dhabi looking to boost their international profile and in any case, these proposals did not materialise.
This was a central piece of 'evidence' in UEFA's case, believe it or not!
This was a central piece of 'evidence' in UEFA's case, believe it or not!
UEFA relied heavily on one email to claim that Pearce was making arrangements with sponsors to source funds from ADUG/Sheikh Mansour.
Hilariously, this email was dated 10 years ago, some 2 years BEFORE FFP was even a thing. So this was a perfectly LEGAL activity anyway.
Hilariously, this email was dated 10 years ago, some 2 years BEFORE FFP was even a thing. So this was a perfectly LEGAL activity anyway.
As a reminder, their ENTIRE case was "premised on the leaked emails", those same emails that provide no evidence of anything whatsoever.
This is emphasised by the fact the CAS mention "no evidence" no fewer than TWELVE times in the report, as highlighted by @slbsn
This is emphasised by the fact the CAS mention "no evidence" no fewer than TWELVE times in the report, as highlighted by @slbsn
For UEFA's accusations of disguising equity funding as sponsorship income to be true, it would have had to have been one almighty conspiracy. It's absurd to suggest it.
As CAS state, several high-ranking employees at huge companies would have to be lying and all in it together.
As CAS state, several high-ranking employees at huge companies would have to be lying and all in it together.
But it doesn't stop there - City would have had to have lied to two governing bodies, and no fewer than FOUR well respected accountancy firms would have had to be in on the conspiracy too.
This is less an evidenced accusation and more a storyline in a Netflix crime drama.
This is less an evidenced accusation and more a storyline in a Netflix crime drama.
A common comment is that City "got away with it on a technicality". Let's explore this nonsense. The quality of UEFA's 'evidence' for the time-barred accusations was no greater than that provided for the more recent accusations. The decision from CAS would have been no different.
Now we arrive at the charge for not cooperating with UEFA's investigation. This is being twisted by the media into "City fail FFP" as they know that people will decide that must mean they are guilty of financial irregularity, even though they aren't. There's a distinction.
The media say not submitting documents to UEFA shows City "had something to hide", yet CAS themselves declared that no adverse inferences can be drawn from City's lack of cooperation, since all info was provided at CAS except for requests that UEFA decided they no longer wanted.
It transpires that all City are really guilty of is not trusting UEFA and opting for an independent setting instead.
When you consider that UEFA set themselves as judge, jury and executioner, can you really blame City for the lack of trust? Who actually DOES trust UEFA? Exactly.
When you consider that UEFA set themselves as judge, jury and executioner, can you really blame City for the lack of trust? Who actually DOES trust UEFA? Exactly.
