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

[cheekybids]

A little off topic, but how do we know Masters was privately vetted by Utd and Liverpool for the job?
Or is it just BM hearsay.

Prem teams furious as Liverpool and United vet league CEO candidates

Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be new chief executive of the Premier League.

www.dailymail.co.uk

This was an article for the CEO who turned it down after their access. I wonder if we have a statement from her.

 

[Centurions]

It's a section X arbitration under the PL rules which is as close to a CAS arbitration you will get under the rules. So the PL chooses an arbitrator, the club chooses an arbitrator and the chair is chosen by those two.

The 115 charges yes, but this legal action is through the public courts is it not?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Rollercoaster 24hrs - dippers terrorist financiers then us taking on the league with potentially unnamed allies and rivals, KDB talking about going to Saudi, reports of alvarez looking out this morning.

We may be many things but we're never boring!!

Never!

 

[Keeper!]

My only criticism of this is the club should have done this the day they walked into the club.

This is a simple case of restriction of trade, which in my opinion is just wrong.

Why should an owner, any owner at that not be allowed to invest in his/hers business and then use that business to promote their other business?

IE Sir Jim Radcliffe own parts of the Mercedes F1 team and he has the name of his company Ineos plastered on the car.

And if Jimmy want to plaster Ineos on the rags shirts good luck to him.

 

[WRicko]

Wonder how much we think we have lost out on and what the damages would be if we won ?

I might be wrong but I don’t see this affecting the 115 this wasn’t in place then think that’s just media trying to make out like we are worried or cheating

 

[jamesha]

thismeanswar

Needs a #

 

[Centurions]

Prem teams furious as Liverpool and United vet league CEO candidates

Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be new chief executive of the Premier League.

www.dailymail.co.uk

This was an article for the CEO who turned it down after their access. I wonder if we have a statement from her.

Was she the one who accepted the job and then backtracked blaming undue influence from 'certain clubs'? It might have been one of the other 2 or 3 who turned it down though.

 

[halfcenturyup]

The 115 charges yes, but this legal action is through the public courts is it not?

115 is a disciplinary panel under Section W. All three members chosen by the PL.

 

[Keeper!]

Never!

I personally would not have it anyother way.

I fucking love the way our club has evolved and the utter devastation it has caused.

 

[manimanc]

Prem teams furious as Liverpool and United vet league CEO candidates

Liverpool and Manchester United have left their Premier League rivals furious after reportedly having had special access to weigh up the candidates to be new chief executive of the Premier League.

www.dailymail.co.uk

This was an article for the CEO who turned it down after their access. I wonder if we have a statement from her.

Masters got it because nobody else felt comfortable in the role.

I wonder why?

Someone obviously pulls the strings of the chairman of the Premier League and masters fits the bill perfectly of being that puppet.

We've obviously seen through this shite and asked the Premier League to show their hand as we hold all the aces.

 

[Centurions]

115 is a disciplinary panel under Section W. All three members chosen by the PL.

I agree, but the question was regarding City's action surely?

 

[arbabarshad]

Arsenal can have emirates as a sponsor.
FA can have emirates as a sponsor.
But city cannot have etihad as a sponsor.
Seems like discrimination for city owners being from
UAE.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Makes us look greedy and dismissive of the league as a whole.At the same time they are defending the 115 charges too, so I’m sure greater minds than mine are behind this, but it won’t win us any popularity contests.Also, if unlimited spending prevails, we risk turning premier league into La Ligurian or SPL !Not sure how I feel on this.

City are not asking for unlimited spending. They just want everyone to be treated the same and not discriminated against.

 

[give it to gordon]

Do you genuinely think the Billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe will be putting his own money into the rags?

Come on, he is not that stupid!!

Agree I wouldn't be surprised if utd are with us on this. Doesn't ineos sponsor his French club ?

 

[Benarbia’s Backheel]

Simon Jordan is going to have an aneurysm live on TalkSPORT. Tune in from 10am.

 

[cheekybids]

Was she the one who accepted the job and then backtracked blaming undue influence from 'certain clubs'? It might have been one of the other 2 or 3 or turned it down though.

Yeah I can’t think who the others were.

 

[Brendan110_0]

It sure looks like we are going all in now, huge couple of weeks coming up for our future and the league's future.

Lose this case and we look proper *ucked

Not really, there's nothing for City to lose here. The rules are in place so nothing would change unless we win.

 

[Burtonblue]

This is a legal action and the arbitration will be heard by a judge who will hold them to the same laws as any british business which is entirely citys case to be fair that the pl rules do not comply with anti competition law in the uk

Well let’s hope the judge isn’t a liverpool fan then! ;-)

 

[halfcenturyup]

I agree, but the question was regarding City's action surely?

115 is a section W action under a disciplinary panel.

City's claim is a section X arbitration action.

All under the PL rules but different rules, a little more like CAS.

 

[Centurions]

Wonder how much we think we have lost out on and what the damages would be if we won ?

I might be wrong but I don’t see this affecting the 115 this wasn’t in place then think that’s just media trying to make out like we are worried or cheating

I've not read everything here as it's moving way too fast but it seems to be about the associated party amendments replacing the accepted related part rules. Like their amendments that allow them to demand unfettered access to anything and everything I think City feel it's far too intrusive and deliberately aimed at clubs with links outside of the USA specifically. I can understand the language used by City. There isn't really any link to the 115 charges as the timescales are too far apart.