Better than what? Somebody had to be chosen to do it. In an ideal universe, yes better not to have the recommendation come from City. It's probably even better still for UEFA if UEFA had made the recommendation and City somehow agreed to it.
But this is not an ideal universe. CAS has a limited pool of arbitrators from which to select and amongst that pool a select few (the known quantities) hear a disproportionate number of proceedings, probably because of their professional qualifications, reputation, standing, etc. So the choice is between the acceptable-to-City Santos (factoring in your knowledge of the guy and the fact that the recommendation from City) or objecting, fighting it longer, prolonging proceedings, which people seem to object to, and still possibly ending up with a lesser known quantity who is more of a wildcard and possibly more susceptible to "influence". You can make the choice to take to option before you or keeping fighting for the ideal/better scenario and face the prospect of increased variability of outcomes.
....Or UEFA are just incompetent or took bribes to get the thing over with. If they went the brides route though, then perhaps both parties have been sloppy. The sneakier way would have been to bribe the UEFA officials then have them make the recommendation of the paid-off panel Chairman to which City begrudgingly assents in the name of speedy justice, which City loves, and then somehow against a panel stacked against them with UEFA's chosen panelists achieve a stunning, underdog victory in typical City fashion.
