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

no doubt media will paint us as the evil side dares to put scrutiny on these new rules that might as well be against current competition law haha.

the paid shills are in full force. no mention of things possibly going back how it was all these years with related party rules of both PL and Uefa still there for all clubs.
 
Democracy or not, there should be someone only presenting things to the clubs for a vote that, first, are clearly legal and, second, are for the benefit of the league as a whole.

Can you imagine what a mess any country would be in if the population voted on everything themselves. The PL needs to have someone who says no, not that and not now. Then they can vote.

The lunatics are running the asylum at the minute.
Imagine if the PL passed a rule that said any promoted club must start their first season on -25 points.
This is, in effect, one possible outcome of saying the PL is a ‘closed shop’ and can do whatever it likes, as long as it gets 70% of people who vote to go along with it.
That could be 8 who abstained, 3 against and 9 for. Motion passes and, presumably, every single ‘journalist’ and commentator would just say, thems the rules so suck it up!
 
Hayley Mcqueen.
Fuckin hates us with a passion.

We got the best team award and she was like oh it's Man City.

Another bitter red in the mainstream.
I always remember after a piece interviewing Garry Cook about City's project she was back on camera and simply said "Deluded" before changing the subject. Spoke too soon there didn't you?
 
The media making out that if we win we will get made up sponsorship deals and the system will crash and be unfair ( anyone could get the deals we get) related part will still exist to me and I don’t know the merits of the case or the precise difference between related and associated but I believe that the law / related party should cover this and if it’s doesn’t then the law should change not the rules of the club in order to discriminate against another member to the benefit of other members and possibly in breach of the law
 
Her worse crime is hating us whilst having Kankles
I always remember after a piece interviewing Garry Cook about City's project she was back on camera and simply said "Deluded" before changing the subject. Spoke too soon there didn't you?
Can’t stand that woman, on the morning of the CAS decision she openly said in the 6 am news, that “City are awaiting the verdict on breaking UEFA FFP rules….which clearly they have” she may have been reading it off the prompt, and it was written by someone else, but I doubted it then and still do
 
One thing that surprised me from listening to Stefan is that the findings from City's legal challenge won't be published as it's supposed to be a confidential process
However, he then asserted that Matt Lawton shouldn't have been given access to the original documents so I wonder if the same club will also leak the result.
 
Could this be connected in anyway to Chelsea’s recent deals regarding the Hotel etc ?
 
According to the Daily Fail, City winning would open the door for PL games to be played in America.

More bullshit from the Rag infested football media to turn even more football fans against City.

View attachment 121369

View attachment 121370
Daily mail post on a daily basis about what will happen if we’re found guilty of 115.
I’ll hazard a guess that it’s run by rags and dippers.
 
City abstained in 2021, when the original rules went through 18-1 (with only Newcastle voting against). In the more recent vote in Feb 24 we were one of the six clubs who voted against it.

We think, because all of this stuff is just journalists guessing or being fed lines. Theres no transparency or official record available to the public.
 
It has no baring on the 115 in my opinion.

One is an alleged breach of a variety of financial rules.

The other is us arguing part of the regulations are anti-competitive.

They are, obviously, quite distinct as issues. And the ruling will be quite distinct. But it is interesting, nevertheless, that City has raised this now and has changed from a defensive stance to an offensive one. Knowing that some sort of ruling about the 115 is due for the autumn, by all accounts I've seen.
It looks to me like a message saying, “Know just who you're taking on.”
 
Yes I know it was time barred. I was just meaning the additional/hidden payment cannot have been a way to circumnavigate FFP, if the payments started 1-2 years before FFP was implemented. I know it wasn’t adjudicated on at CAS, was just more of a general point wondering why we did if (if the allegations are true).
It couldn't have been a way to circumvent FFP, as you say. As well as it preceding the introduction of FFP our losses were huge in those years, so it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top