By Andrew Warshaw
June 8 – Manchester City are bracing themselves for one of the biggest weeks in the club’s recent history as they take on UEFA at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to appeal against a two-year ban from European competition for breaching financial fair play (FFP) rules which, if they lose the case, could cost them an estimated £200 million.
CAS has set aside three days, starting today, to hear City’s case with no timetable set for a verdict though a ruling will be needed before English teams enter next season’s Champions League draw.
The draw in Monaco is scheduled for August 27 but could be pushed back because of the fallout from the coronavirus pandemic and the fact that this season’s competition first needs to be completed.
In the round of 16, where this season’s tournament has reached, City beat Real Madrid in the first leg in Spain, with the return postponed since March.
City, who crave the Champions League title more than any other, were banned by UEFA in February for “serious breaches” and have been accused of deceiving UEFA in order to comply with the regulations. Announcing its verdict four months ago, UEFA said the Abu Dhabi-owned club was guilty of “overstating its sponsorship revenue in its accounts and in the break-even information submitted to UEFA between 2012 and 2016.”
UEFA’s Adjudicatory Chamber also said City had “failed to cooperate in the investigation of this case”.
The current English champions were also fined €30 million following an official investigation sparked by leaked documents published in November 2018 by German magazine Der Spiegel which claimed City’s owners had tried to circumvent FFP rules by putting money into the club disguised as sponsorship income.
City’s chief executive Ferran Soriano has denounced the allegations as totally untrue.
“We provided the evidence but in the end this FFP Investigatory Chamber relied more on out of context stolen emails than all the other evidence we provided of what actually happened and I think it is normal that we feel like we feel,” he said in February. “Ultimately based on our experience and our perception this seems to be less about justice and more about politics.”
City’s legal team is reported to be led by Lord David Pannick QC who successfully represented anti-Brexit campaigner Gina Miller against the British government last September when the Supreme Court ruled Prime Minister Boris Johnson acted illegally by suspending Parliament.
UEFA’s ruling, if upheld, would mean City will be barred both from competing in the 2020-21 Champions League and from European competition the following campaign. The upshot of missing out on a Champions League season would cost the club as much as £100 million per season in prize money and broadcast revenue, as well as matchday and other revenues, plus seriously reduce the attraction for big-name players to carry on signing for the club.
The knock-on effect would mean the team who finishes fifth this season, currently Manchester United, would take City’s place in next season’s Champions League.
However, should City be successful in overturning the ban, it would cast doubt over UEFA’s authority and serve as a significant precedent in terms of the whole future of FFP whose rubrik has already come under scrutiny during the Covid-19 pandemic .
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1713564196labto1713564196ofdlr1713564196owedi1713564196sni@w1713564196ahsra1713564196w.wer1713564196dna1713564196