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

Cobwebcat said:
Click to expand...


Stefan must be getting exhausted doing this so often. He seems to enjoy it in the videos but Christ he’s taking on a lot of work for a lot of abuse and no real reward.

We essentially have a single fan who has gotten so fed up of misinformation and shit reporting in the absence of an official response that he’s taken it upon himself to put City’s side across and the club don’t even learn from his success.

He probably can’t use Bluemoon anymore because he likely gets 100+ notifications every time he logs on. I can’t even imagine how fucking weird some of those United and Liverpool fans get - and that’s just the employed journalists.
 
Metal Biker said:
What, arguing on Twitter? Yes it is boring, don't do it.
Click to expand...
Even if i didnt argue on twitter, it would be coming on here and reading the continuous recycled arguments, pundits/commentators going on about our investigations, the petty digs from my mates which I’ve argued about for years. Even if today’s latest legal battle reveal means City are fighting back, it’s not football.
 
The sky clip above just subtly paints the picture that the rules are in place to protect and keep everyone honest and City are asking for them to be removed so they can do all the dodgy middle eastern business they please
 
The statements in support of the league are going to have to be worded very carefully to not help our case.

Too much "we need it to stop City and Newcastle" and it only backs up the idea that its discriminatory.
 
StillBluessinceHydeRoad said:
Some on here need to calm down, take a few deep breaths and think about what they are posting. We are not about to destroy the PL and from what I can gather we are not even taking legal action because our hearing is before an independent commission (appointed according to PL rules) which will decide if the rules concerning "associated parties" are consistent with competition law and/or are discriminatory. If the regulations are ruled unlawful the situation will revert to what it was before 2021, unless we widen the hearing to a consideration of whether ATPs are simply another means of restricting the right of owners from the Gulf to attract revenue for their clubs and thus limit investment. Only in such a case might this hearing have an impact on the "115 " hearing. I think City have a strong case but the aim is no wider than to see the end of the latest piece of nonsense. I don't think it will affect our "other" hearing for which we have another strong (unarguable, or even "irrefutable") case - that we simply have not broken any of their rules, however stupid they may be.
Click to expand...

Generally agree. But is it an independent commission, though?

No idea who this legal case is brought in front of, but I imagine if it is against the PL and there is further chance of loss claim, then it is nothing to to do with the PL's commissions, independent or not. The article refers to a tribunal. That, or some level of court, sounds more logical.
 
Coatigan said:
Generally agree. But is it an independent commission, though?

No idea who this legal case is brought in front of, but I imagine if it is against the PL and there is further chance of loss claim, then it is nothing to to do with the PL's commissions, independent or not. The article refers to a tribunal. That, or some level of court, sounds more logical.
Click to expand...
That's how I see it , a civil court dealing with competition law
 
halfcenturyup said:
One of the clubs contacted for their input (the PL are treating confidentiality so seriously they even got permission from the tribunal to do that).

Probably Liverpool given the source.
Click to expand...
So it broke on the same day as Charter Standard scandal & you think Liverpool are the leak?

Nah, them cheeky American chappies would never play dirty like that….
 
Coatigan said:
Generally agree. But is it an independent commission, though?

No idea who this legal case is brought in front of, but I imagine if it is against the PL and there is further chance of loss claim, then it is nothing to to do with the PL's commissions, independent or not. The article refers to a tribunal. That, or some level of court, sounds more logical.
Click to expand...

It's reported as a Section X tribunal under PL rules. Each party chooses an arbitrator and the two choose a chairman.

Not sure how a PL tribunal can make judgments on competition law personally, no matter what the rules say. But I'm not a lawyer.
 
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