On what basis would the EPL deduct points for purported misreporting to UEFA under FFP during 2012-14? At that time the EPL did not have FFP or similar reporting requirements.
This is directed to UK media speculation on this topic that has little connection with the claims underlying City's second round of punishment after UEFA's agreed and negotiated settlement that was formally closed in 2016.
Everything old is new again and as a City fan I look forward to the CAS appeal and whatever legal action may follow.
Which required more fact finding and adjudication.
There commercial contracts were bogus and artificially manipulated to meet FFA requirements. The depth of that book cooking hadn't come to light in 2016.
The PL, even if they didn't have financial fair play requirements in place at the time did require it's members to comply with UEFA reporting.
by independent third parties and UEFA.
Even if one accepts the hacked emails selectively released on their face, and that City are not allowed a defense in explaining context for those emails, and that it is OK that the ajudicatory body leaks information and findings to the press prior to judgement, none of that matters. UEFA auditors certified Etihad as an unrelated party and the sponsorship fees paid as fair market value, so how they are funded through interlocking companies wouldn't be relevant.
Worse though, this process and associated smear campaigns have been corrupt from the outset without due process or fairness. If CAS doesn't exonerate City, they will rightly take this outside the sports system to the Swiss courts.
For a counterexample, see the FA's dismissal of Liverpool hacking City scouting computers or their evaluation and treatment under FFP when they failed several years ago.
Regardless, I would be surprised if that is a permissible basis to avoid a settlement agreement that specifically addressed the issue of whether City inflated the value of its sponsorships from purportedly related entities in the relevant time period—a settlement UEFA has already formally acknowledged was complied with and closed. Moreover, FFP’s limitations provisions appear to prohibit punishment for alleged breaches from more than 5 years ago—regardless of whatever “new evidence” is claimed to have been found.
Of course, we don’t have access to UEFA’s opinion, so we don’t have any way to know the strength of its legal analysis.
In any event, if you are a lawyer or are at all interested in an intellectually honest look at the situation, I recommend the following links for your reading pleasure:
https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-manchester-city-uefa-go-to-war/
https://ninetythreetwenty.com/blog/seeing-the-wood-for-the-ffps-part-deux-the-double-city-do-not-want/
For a good piece about how FFP itself is a sham, I recommend:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8013475/amp/The-game-framed-UEFA-Europes-privileged-elite-BENT.html?__twitter_impression=true
That is, on the basis that the big clubs who control the organization demanded it find a way to stop upstarts like City. Apparently, you don’t need much more than that. You can just make up the reasons as you go along.
Does it really matter otherwise?
Liverpool is not catchable......but a point reduction would ensure a Sheffield, Tottenham or Chelsea make the top 4
and MC is not even close to relegation
That if they're banned, their placing isn't relevant. So if they finish top 4, the 5th place team goes instead. So this would be a punishment as opposed to preventing them from finishing top 4.
shifting the championships where this would have made the difference? That would essentially strip them of 3 titles...