Apart from whipping up hatred of City across the EFL as well as the Premier League.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
Yes. It is.
That is the entire purpose of a phone-in discussion show. You don't really think it's about having a reasoned debate, do you?
phone calls aren't how they make money or how they operate.
they're shock jocks.
Second paragrapgh...
Premier League’s rules on sponsorship deals, which forbid related companies (such as Etihad Airways sponsoring a team backed by Abu Dhabi)
I'm fairly certain Etihad aren't classed as a related party? not that the they let the truth get in the way of a story.
It isn't but this new rule we are saying is unlawful maybe that Etihad deal now has been set as associated and been reduced by a 1/4? All guess work on my part though..
Clubs siding with red cartels should remember that sooner or later these rules will come and bite their anus from behind .
They won't remember.
City and fans were saying the ffp rules etc will damage a clubs attempts to get into the top 4.
Fast forward many years and the penny has dropped but City are still the ones who get criticised.
Stefan was quite convinced it wouldn’t be made pubic but he didn’t say why. I don’t know!
- Rule X.31 specifies: "The award shall be in writing and shall contain reasons for the tribunal’s decision. A copy of it shall be provided to the Board and to the Chair of the Judicial Panel. Where the award contains decisions on points of law or interpretation that the Chair of the Judicial Panel considers to be of wider application or use to the Board and Clubs, with the agreement of the parties to the arbitration, he/she may produce and circulate to the Board (for distribution to Clubs) an anonymised summary of the award."
No provision for wider release but maybe they will agree to that
I've always found it incredibly strange that a bunch of English literature graduates are somehow qualified to write about a dense legal and financial regulatory setup with any sort of platform or authority. I've a mate whose opinion is usually "I have absolutely no idea". He's a Grade 3 prosecutor for the CPS on the Fraud List.
How in the world he says he can't offer a decent opinion and only general thoughts (as he's not familiar with football regs like you) but some broadsheet journo thinks they've got it all figured out just beggars belief.
Maybe I've finally turned into one of the crackpots but I don't believe for one second the stories that this would kill the EFL deal, bring about the superleague, let 39th games be played overseas and end all financial regulation etc. were thought up independently by these journalists. They're getting given stories by our rivals and they're too stupid or not interested in sorting out which ones actually have substance and which should be binned.
If you were to deliberately pick 3 topics that would get all fans united against something it would be money to grassroots, 39th games and the Superleague, and despite there being absolutely no way that this could bring about any of those things, the Daily Mail has been told by it's sources that these things will happen.
It took nearly 3 days for the fact 4 other clubs are potentially siding with us to emerge FFS! So it's not 1 club vs the world anymore, it's possibly 4/5 massive clubs.
Last edited:
Gone for a Burton
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2022
- Messages
- 6,398
- Team supported
- City
White American
V
Brown Arabs who invest long term in executives, teams,infrastructure, facilities,neighbourhoods, sporting excellence & success etc etc
Duplicitous white American owners who extract maximum profit.......Is the definition of associated party completely open-ended?
Under the current rules what is to stop the PL saying that the Manyoo/Livarpool/Arse American sponsors are not associated parties and therefore not subject to any assessment or limits for 'PSR' limits but our sponsors from Abu Dhabi are associated to our owners therefore our subject to their assessment before being cleared.
V
Brown Arabs who invest long term in executives, teams,infrastructure, facilities,neighbourhoods, sporting excellence & success etc etc
Thanks Stefan. Now we know.This means that while the arbitration proceedings are confidential and conducted in private, the written award is shared with theparties and the Board and the Chair of the Judicial Panel. If the award includes decisions that have broader implications, an anonymised summary may be distributed to the Clubs, provided there is agreement from the parties involved.
- Rule X.31 specifies: "The award shall be in writing and shall contain reasons for the tribunal’s decision. A copy of it shall be provided to the Board and to the Chair of the Judicial Panel. Where the award contains decisions on points of law or interpretation that the Chair of the Judicial Panel considers to be of wider application or use to the Board and Clubs, with the agreement of the parties to the arbitration, he/she may produce and circulate to the Board (for distribution to Clubs) an anonymised summary of the award."
No provision for wider release but maybe they will agree to that
marco
Well-Known Member
Newcastle,Forest ,Villa ,Chelsea,Everton and ofcourse City should pull the plug on the eve of the 24/25 season if things are not sorted to a more competative change of rules
Protein Junkie
Well-Known Member
“one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”.
GW Bush tenure may be remembered for his line “You are either with us or against us”
Do you see any parallels with us yet?
In the world of the Yankee dollar, your cause is defined as right or wrong based on how you align with the West.Causes that do not align are vilified by the Western Press.
And this is the Classic US playbook. We dare challenge the profiteering of yank owners. They want a race to the bottom or at least the status quo to maintain its existence.
The alternate theory -City, Newcastle are your terrorists or to us freedom fighters. These freedom fighters nearly always fight for a good cause. The non alignment translates to terrorists in the eyes of the West.
A Yankee driven West that fears a City,Villa,Newcastle axis that will change the old order and wipe away hopes of profiteering.
And that to me is a holistic view of the constant battle we face.
GW Bush tenure may be remembered for his line “You are either with us or against us”
Do you see any parallels with us yet?
In the world of the Yankee dollar, your cause is defined as right or wrong based on how you align with the West.Causes that do not align are vilified by the Western Press.
And this is the Classic US playbook. We dare challenge the profiteering of yank owners. They want a race to the bottom or at least the status quo to maintain its existence.
The alternate theory -City, Newcastle are your terrorists or to us freedom fighters. These freedom fighters nearly always fight for a good cause. The non alignment translates to terrorists in the eyes of the West.
A Yankee driven West that fears a City,Villa,Newcastle axis that will change the old order and wipe away hopes of profiteering.
And that to me is a holistic view of the constant battle we face.
The 115 charges and these current Associated Party issues are tiresome and wear you down after a while. My love for the game is wavering and the constant attacks by the media are draining. I hope I am wrong, but I'm not confident we are going to succeed in the revision of Associated Party transaction rule.
Hi Schfc6 how have you deduced that a third of clubs will have to sell players? Because the rules are to be backdated?
I don’t follow.
'Hang it in the Louvre'. Yea it was an oldie but felt apt to re-use given all these flying media metaphors.Love this reference...even more so since I saw the real thing (minus Jack) in the Louvre just the other month....it is indeed a masterpiece!
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 15,041
money, money, money at the end of the day you can only put 11 out on the pitch and that is a simple fact, a product of our academy dragged us to the title this year, that wasnt money, a rag youth product scored the winner for them in the fa cup that wasnt money, thats all these fuckwits are focused on and obviously it bloody helps but it is definitely not the only thing.
Gobshite!
Take those two on and you take me on as well ;)
I love you and want to have your children.
I don't think the ATP case will go our way - but at least it's being challenged. It SHOULD be challenged if it is anti-competitive.The 115 charges and these current Associated Party issues are tiresome and wear you down after a while. My love for the game is wavering and the constant attacks by the media are draining. I hope I am wrong, but I'm not confident we are going to succeed in the revision of Associated Party transaction rule.
I'm not letting a few client journalists and the sheep they attract to interfere with the enjoyment of being the best there is.
oi its knobhead to you sirGobshite!
I love you and want to have your children.
Plavivoice
Member
- Joined
- 14 Mar 2015
- Messages
- 19
@KS55 - I think it is clear that there is already, in general, outside of the current issue, a wide media agenda against us.What would you do with this critique when complete or is it just for academic purposes?How did he do this? I am considering writing a critique of the press treatment of City and would welcome any info you have.
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2009
- Messages
- 16,617
Sorry I didn't realise you were quoting Sky sports.I don’t follow.
- No provision for wider release but maybe they will agree to that
I'm sure if it goes against City, it will leak to The Times from one of the parties....
There is a certain madness to the Premier League that I am sure the City lawyers can exploit.
1) Fair value for transfer fees. Should Liverpool be allowed to sell Coutinho for £125 Million when everyone knew he was not worth it?
2) Fair value for transfer fees again. The Saudis were, apparently, willing to pay £200 Million for 31yr old Mo Salah. Seriously? So it's alright for the Red Top sides to get inflated sums but seemingly not ok for City?
3) Is this the first time in football history when a controlling sporting body wants to lower the quality of their sport? Sick of seeing Tiger Woods, Roger Federer, Ronnie O'Sullivan, Usain Bolt, Frankel, Red Rum, etc win. Why don't we just ban them? Let's just ban excellence.
1) Fair value for transfer fees. Should Liverpool be allowed to sell Coutinho for £125 Million when everyone knew he was not worth it?
2) Fair value for transfer fees again. The Saudis were, apparently, willing to pay £200 Million for 31yr old Mo Salah. Seriously? So it's alright for the Red Top sides to get inflated sums but seemingly not ok for City?
3) Is this the first time in football history when a controlling sporting body wants to lower the quality of their sport? Sick of seeing Tiger Woods, Roger Federer, Ronnie O'Sullivan, Usain Bolt, Frankel, Red Rum, etc win. Why don't we just ban them? Let's just ban excellence.