City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

Manc in London said:
Indeed. Imagine an organisation being told that they are restricted in bringing in money, in which some of this will be spent on women's football, community development, diversionary activities for youth, supporting better outcomes for people with a disability and so on. Maybe a restriction on spend for the men's team is more reasonable (it is unreasonable in my personal opinion) but ultimately this will could impact on City's spend in areas not related to men's football. I am sure there are some very smart barristers advising on this.

Maybe a bit of a powerplay going on here. It could be to bring back into focus the need for an independent regulator (goodness knows what is happening in relation to the regulator with a change in Govt likely) or maybe a more direct attack on the governance structure of the PL.
Click to expand...
Tracey Crouch said last week that the Football Governance Bill was dead upon the announcement of the General Election taking place in July. She hopes that the new government (however it looks) will be able to take it forwards, but for now it goes nowhere.
 
domalino said:
This has nothing to do with FFP or UEFA or things 15 years ago.

This is about the rules voted on after the Saudi takeover of Newcastle.
Click to expand...

Is it not just this year that they have been formalised, meant to start soon? As opposed to having been in place the last 3 years. I.e the club are challenging them ahead of implementing, rather than retrospectively. I think.
 
Last edited:
SkyBlueCanuck said:
Aren't they though?

If the AP rules have held a club back from accepting a more lucrative sponsor deal, would that not also impact the FFP/PSR outcomes?
Click to expand...
All the charges are pre-2018, not sure the APT rules would even effect that case
 
domalino said:
Right - but those rules came in 3 years ago (Nov 2021) and we did nothing until the 2 parties are in a huge, other, legal battle. I think people arguing the 2 are unrelated are being very naive.
Click to expand...
Tactics, Dom, tactics. City stated at the time that they had legal advice which suggested the new rules were unlawful. The PL were on notice, in effect. Maybe there have been discussions in which the PL would not budge, even though City could point to actual lost opportunities.
 
Claims that we have had to limit spending on youth development, women's football and community work as a result of the rules the PL brought in. While also not being able to go for the 'best players' without needing to increase ticket prices etc.
 
It's time for all the subservient pus@#$s to now come out of the woodwork. How the fuck would any of you know why City would feel strongly enough about this that they'd take these steps? How about ya wait like maybe a few minutes to hear from some experts as to wtf is going on? "Oh no, now the PL will be mad at us and we'll be fucked on the 115". What a shit bag attitude to take on. Fuck the PL. Have they given a single shit about how our people, ownership, staff, squad, and us supporters have felt when they hit us purposefully with these ridiculous 115 charges? How about the fact that we've had to endure our most successful period ever under a cloud and a constant bombardment from the media and rival prick fans. Like I said, fuck the Prem...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top