Manchester City won its appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) for alleged financial violations of fair play and are free to play in the Champions League next season, it was announced Monday.
Originally, the City was kicked out of European competitions for two seasons, but it gained its appeal for CAS, meaning that fifth place in the Premier League will no longer qualify for the Champions League. Manchester United is fifth in the table as it is, behind third place Chelsea and fourth place Leicester City.
An initial fine of € 30 million was also reduced to € 10 million after Monday’s verdict. The CAS said that most of the alleged infractions were not established or had no deadline.
The Club’s Financial Control Agency (CFCB) had previously found that the City “committed serious violations” of the FFP regulations, which limit the net losses that clubs can accumulate over a three-year period, between 2012 and 2016 and not cooperated with further investigation
City brought their case to CAS on June 8 after the independent CFCB adjudication chamber issued the initial ban and fine.
On Monday, the CAS statement said the charges related to the concealment of capital funds “were clearly more significant violations than obstructing CFCB investigations,” and therefore deemed it inappropriate to impose a ban on participation in competitions of UEFA clubs.
“However, considering i) MCFC’s financial resources; ii) the importance of club cooperation in CFCB investigations, due to its limited means of investigation; and iii) MCFC’s disregard for that principle and In its obstruction of the investigations, the CAS panel determined that a significant fine should be imposed on MCFC and deemed it appropriate to reduce UEFA’s initial fine by 2/3, that is, to the amount of € 10 million. “
– Complete table of the Premier League
– Man City’s appeal is successful: Who now qualifies for Europe?
A statement by Manchester City on Monday said: “While Manchester City and its legal advisers have not yet reviewed the full ruling of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the Club appreciates the implications of today’s ruling as a validation of the position of the Club and the body of evidence it was able to present. The Club wishes to thank the panel members for their diligence and the due process they administered. “
– UCL Draw: Man City learns quarter-final opponents
The CFCB found that the City “committed serious violations” of the FFP regulations, which limit the net losses that clubs can accumulate over a three-year period, between 2012 and 2016, and did not cooperate with the subsequent investigation.
The club was said to have exaggerated “its sponsorship earnings in its accounts and in the balance information submitted to UEFA between 2012 and 2016”.
In response, City claimed the process was “flawed” and said there was “irrefutable evidence” that would lead them to win an appeal. The FFP was introduced by UEFA at the start of the 2011-12 campaign as a way to prevent clubs from falling into financial difficulties by overspending.
Before Monday’s verdict, manager Pep Guardiola had said he was “so sure” that City would overturn the ban.
“The intention is that every season I play in the Champions League to the best of my ability, it’s not about Monday,” Guardiola said.
Despite the verdict and ongoing questions about how FFP is implemented, UEFA said in a statement that it has been a beneficial force for the game.
“In recent years, Financial Fair Play has played an important role in protecting clubs and helping them to be financially sustainable and UEFA and ECA [European Club Association] remain committed to their principles, “said a statement by UEFA.
“UEFA will not comment further on this.”
The city can also compete in this season’s Champions League. They have a 2-1 advantage in the first leg over Real Madrid in the round of 16, and will play against Juventus or Lyon in the quarterfinals if they progress.
La Liga President Javier Tebas, who has long criticized City, expressed his discontent with the decision on Monday and said it was time to examine CAS’s role.
“We have to reevaluate whether CAS is the appropriate body to appeal institutional decisions in soccer,” he added. “Switzerland [where the CAS is located] It is a country with a great history of arbitration; CAS is not up to it. “
.
