"If the facts are proven, there is real fraud on the part of City"

• UEFA has suspended Manchester City from the European cups (C1 and C3) for the next two seasons.
• In question, the non-compliance with the rules of financial fair play over the period 2012-2016.
• The club will appeal to the Sports Arbitral Tribunal (CAS).

After the shock, place for analysis. Heavily sanctioned and deprived of European cups (C1 or C3) during the next two seasons for non-compliance with the rules of financial fair play, Manchester City will appeal this decision before the Arbitration Tribunal for Sport. Jean-Christophe Breillat, lawyer specializing in sports law and member of the CDES of Limoges, helps us to decipher the secrets of this call and to consider the consequences of this incredible case.

Can the CAS cancel the sanctions against Manchester City, as has already been seen in the past with PSG, Galatasaray or AC Milan?

I want to say first of all that I do not know the content of the file, but from what I understand is that there is still a big difference between the case of PSG or Milan. For them, it was not so much real fraud they were accused of as an overestimation of sponsorship contracts. In the case of City, we understand that some large sponsors did not pay the club the agreed sums but that it was the United Arab Emirates, owners of Manchester City, who paid a large part of the bill in the background. If this is proven, we can speak of real fraud, the problem is therefore not exactly the same.

This contrasts with the tone of the official press release published by Manchester City, which seems almost ironic and clearly calls into question the independence of the UEFA supervisory body.

We can always consider that internal regulatory bodies cannot, in essence, be independent of the federations from which they come [here, UEFA with the ICFC]. We heard about the financial fair play regulatory body at UEFA, we heard it recently at national level concerning the commissions of the Rugby League on the salary cap . Afterwards, we must also see who these bodies are made up of and when we look a little more closely at the case of the ICFC, it is a former Belgian Prime Minister who heads this commission… He and his assessors are not people born from the last rain, these are not people who need to make UEFA feel that they are indebted to it, etc. So I find it difficult to understand the argument of the lack of independence of these bodies. In my opinion, this is the poor man's argument, it is a smoke screen more than anything else.

CLUB STATEMENThttps: //t.co/ueMFeLFowu

There is a way of appeal which is opened via the arbitral tribunal of sport, it will be examined by other people who, if we put aside all questions of independence, may have a different appreciation of the documents in the file. Depending on this, and depending on how the case is going to be defended by the lawyers of Manchester, it is not excluded that the outcome will be different. We must not insult the future but hide only behind the presumption of non-independence of the UEFA judges, I do not find that particularly convincing. Remember also that in the PSG case, it was for questions of form [the UEFA had not respected certain deadlines], and not of substance, that the Parisian club came out before the CAS.

Since the investigation began, Manchester City has been taking notes and examining the financial activities of its rivals.

Some clubs have received additional funds from sponsors.

These elements will be presented during the call.

📰 [The Athletic]

Can financial fair play still be attacked on its very principle? This is a question that has arisen in the past when other clubs have been sentenced.

This is something that is possible. Up to now, financial fair play could have been called into question as such by the CAS on the occasion of the numerous cases which have been submitted to it or, up to now, the very principle of financial fair play has not been questioned. Now we cannot exclude the possibility that action may be brought, in particular before Community bodies on the basis of competition law, freedom to conduct business, freedom to trade and industry. But on the side of community authorities, much more now than at the time of the Bosman judgment, there is a desire to find a certain balance to be found between these principles of freedom and the necessary regulation of the financial system of professional sport. So, in absolute terms, we can contest the very principle of the FPF, but I am not sure that a community judge would go so far as to sweep it away with the back of my hand.

We do not yet know the timetable for the procedure, but can it stretch over time? And if so, how will it go with Man City's qualification for the Champions League next season?

Yes, the procedure will probably last quite a long time. This is a fairly complex file which requires fairly detailed analyzes. One could imagine in absolute terms that things are finished before the start of the next season, but there is also a good chance that this is not the case. In principle, the appeal that the leaders of City will file before the CAS is not suspensive, now, City can form a request for suspensive effect by motivating it and by explaining that it is necessary to suspend the decision which is disputed because, if the suspension is effected while the dispute is not yet settled by the CAS, this would have irreversible consequences. Whereas if the suspension is suspended, if you pass me the phrase, and upon arrival the sanction is confirmed during the 2020-2021 season, it will simply be delayed. I think that Manchester City will file a suspensive effect request and that this will be granted to allow time for the proceedings to go smoothly to completion. There is also the possibility of an accelerated procedure, which can resolve the matter within a few weeks. But for this it is necessary beforehand that UEFA and Manchester City agree to use this type of procedure.

• Financial fair play
• heap
• Soccer
• Sport
• Manchester City
• Uefa