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

Just listened to Mat Lawton's propaganda on talksport! Talking about we don't want 2 billion a year sponsors or airlines giving over market value sponsors and if Man City win they'll be no fair market value sponsors! Sorry he is talking absolutely shite! If we win it will go back to before 2021 where deals were looked at for fair value!
 
PPT said:
It's the exact opposite with football fans. The problem is that they swallow what SKY Sports and talkSHITE tell them daily. I won't be surprised if our players get booed at the Euros by the so-called 'England fans'. I really won't.
Click to expand...
I hope they do, nothing would motivate these guys to go for 5 in a row than some neanderthal booing from the terraces and the media arseholes doing their thing.

And the last few days has left me in no doubt whatsoever that Pep will be re-signing.
 
Gordyola said:
I feel you have the wrong end of a shirt stick
Firstly City are not campaigning for “unlimited spending” although it wasnt a problem when it was the cartel’s MO
Popularity is irrelevant and too later anyhow
This case is seeking fairness and the return to the Feb 24 status quo
With repect to the 115 then the club have every right to defend its self especially as it claims irrefutable evidence of it’s innocence
Click to expand...
It's amazing that people still don't know what Mondays hearing is actually about by this point. Perhaps we need a sticky at the top. I thought we had one for the 115 charges?
 
Coatigan said:
Only if those companies then announce huge deals with Etihad.

Fuck them, make them squirm.
Click to expand...

Maybe the Etihad deal was going to be redone and this new rule looked at it and knocked it back and why we sueing the premier because it's gong to effect us massively!
 
To all our haters

Fuck Off GIFs - Find & Share on GIPHY
 
Keeper! said:
I hope they do, nothing would motivate these guys to go for 5 in a row than some neanderthal booing from the terraces and the media arseholes doing their thing.

And the last few days has left me in no doubt whatsoever that Pep will be resigning.
Click to expand...
Yep. He doesn't need this shit, as none of us do.
Unfortunately, that will be a major victory for the PL and the media.
 
Keeper! said:
I hope they do, nothing would motivate these guys to go for 5 in a row than some neanderthal booing from the terraces and the media arseholes doing their thing.

And the last few days has left me in no doubt whatsoever that Pep will be resigning.
Click to expand...
Hopefully you meant re-signing ;)
 
petrusha said:
I think this is true, but just to add to it a bit. The drafting of 'associated party' is extraordinarily wide. I presume City are arguing that the wording catches US sponsorship deals for US-owned club just as it covers UAE sponsorship deals for us, but that it's being applied in a discriminatory manner so that only the latter are reviewed. We'll see.

The hysterical reaction in the media is risible. City prevail only if the PL has been/is acting unlawfully, you cunts.
Click to expand...

Lawton this morning on talksport seemed to be taking a load of bollocks
 
As Stefan pointed out, it is a unique and uncompetitive business practice to require prospective club sponsors to submit financial justification of their proposed sponsorship to a third party for approval before sponsorship and will deter potential sponsorship of PL clubs. Prospective sponsors are more likely to look elsewhere, perhaps to other sports or foreign clubs on their deals.

Further if all PL club spending is anchored to the spend of the lowest PL clubs it will be harder for PL clubs to compete with the top European clubs like RM and PSG. There is a danger anti competitive business practice will prevent PL clubs competing at the highest level in European competitions and beyond.

It will be tested in the courts if such proposed uncompetitive business practices are lawful?

The British media is unnecessarily scaremongering the public about the realities of this case
 
we really need to make a case around the leak of this. if PL confidentiality is in the rules someone has to be charged of breaking that rule.
otherwise we have 100+ charges against us and other break the rules and have no charges against them.

still the silence on Chelsea's historical wrongdoing is not answered yet by PL despite they self admitted it, what investigation must be needed there really.
 
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