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

Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
la-olorosa-the-rock.gif
 
Kippax Street 1880 said:
Well it didn't fucking work did it? Never heard a peep about human rights abuses in the UAE until they bought City. All these Journalists who slag us to fuck because we stopped their football team winning trophies would be in Abu Dhabi once a year for the Grand Prix sipping free champers telling us all how wonderful everything is with loads of anecdotes about wise Bedouins and how Sheikh Mohammed learnt from the best at Sandhurst.
Click to expand...
How many of those football journalists constantly linking us to human rights abuses in the UAE told their editors they wouldn't be going to the Qatar World Cup on ethical grounds?
 
A friend of mine in work who is a red, but he’s an Intelligent person, who you can have a sensible chat with him most times, thinks there is on jeopardy in Sheikh Mansour/Abu Dhabi funding and owning City because they’ve got limitless amounts of money. My counter argument was, there’s no jeopardy for American ‘billionaires’ owning United, Liverpool and Arsenal either.
 
Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
Haha, a new toy for us to play with , do you not have a life
 
Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
I think you're not a City fan.
 
Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
We did, we have no related sponsorships, but the PL changed the rule to ‘Associated’. So deals we made years ago are changed in status whenever they are renewed. This change is the whole point which you are missing by a country mile.
 
Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
2f2j1z.jpg
 
Tim of the Oak said:
it’s a long shot but I wonder if we could get answers to matters unrelated to the current cases. For example, why was Adebayor banned for the knee slide against Arsenal, even though Ade and his family had been racially abused throughout the game. Probably asking too much.
Click to expand...
If we can get the Ade mystery sorted, we could finally lift the lid on a variety of City Cup for Cock up mysteries:

Kevin Horlocks aggressive walking
Jo
Dunneys own goal betting patterns
One goal in 5 months at home
Jo
PJS Attendance figures
Quinny playing for draw for AB
Jo
Not going for another goal against BM
Steve Coppell
Pearce missed penalty
Mark Halsey

Just a shame smart phones weren't around in them days m'lud.
 
salfordbluetrue said:
Not been on for a couple of days, been trying to get information, the first thing is, i am astounded that City finally stood up for themselves, then there was the worry that City were using this as their case on FFP was faltering, but this was dismissed by the fact the PL had backed City into a corner.
So where are we? the thing noticeable is City`s attack is multi pronged,
The first being that the change in rules is illegal. At this point the media is trying to drag us off down a rabbit hole, related owners are already restricted , CAS proved that we were already complying with these regulations limited in what they can invest. The February rule change can limit what non related parties can invest it can also veto investors, and as such stops free trade, it may also break one of the freedoms we are all born with. The PL league can run illegal rules but it needs 100% agreement, it can kick out the dissenters to obtain the 100%, but it is highly unlikely the PL would survive this course of action, so quietly dropping this rule is the most likely which will question the PL use of the rules in the 115.
Next is the ` Tyranny of the majority` a clever use of words that the media is describing as democracy, before we start this we have to point out why the PL is very worried about this, a few years ago the Government threated the PL if it did not get it`s house in order, when concerning racism, they papered over the cracks, and brought in their kick it out campaign. If City had gone down the racism or anti Muslim route the attack would be very hard to prove, fortunately we did not, proving tyranny is easier there are thousands of bits of evidence, probably the biggest is the Hateful Eight, who wanted punishment on City before the PL had even charged city, and the latest on SKY where an Arsenal official, Tony Adams claimed they can not compete with City financially, and needed the PL to take action. From tyranny to racism, or anti Muslim is a very small step.
Next is City`s attack on the company that will be used to decide far value, while i know nothing about this, City have had their fair share of companies that are supposed to be impartial only to find they are hostile companies, the PL and UEFA have a very poor record for integrity, and this could reflect on the 115.
There may be more but i have not seen it, so while i do not expect to win all, i do think we will win what is very important, for Football to be called a sport and not an entertainment.,
Click to expand...
FYI: The PL cannot run illegal rules, they are subject to the laws of England. Nor could they have a rule stating that English law does not apply. If the PL rules break Competition Law, they must change them. This will not be easy to prove.
 
oakiecokie said:
That sounds so Raggish my friend, so you have me wondering if you are a wolf in sheeps clothing.
City hire some of the best people in all aspects of running the Club and to query if some are "competent" is something other fans would say.
Click to expand...
Sounds worse than Raggish. Sounds like a complete buffoon. So an ownership group based anywhere in the world should not include any investment in terms of sponsorship from wherever they are from? Fucking ridiculous to think all parties are related and thus inflated. The business world is filled with symbiotic relationships. What this bozo is proposing is that City be held to a different standard. A much more restrictive one. Take the bullshit elsewhere Mr. Atom...
 
Dodge said:
If we can get the Ade mystery sorted, we could finally lift the lid on a variety of City Cup for Cock up mysteries:

Kevin Horlocks aggressive walking
Jo
Dunneys own goal betting patterns
One goal in 5 months at home
Jo
PJS Attendance figures
Quinny playing for draw for AB
Jo
Not going for another goal against BM
Steve Coppell
Pearce missed penalty
Mark Halsey

Just a shame smart phones weren't around in them days m'lud.
Click to expand...
No chance, Jo will forever be a mystery.

More chance of finding out who the sniper on the hill was.
 
Imagine if Arsenal was owned by a person from Rawanda.

49A0C680-0004-407C-98E1-A8AAB866CDFD.jpeg

The sponsorship deal wouldn’t be allowed under PL rules, or it would face fair value scrutiny, just like the United and Chevrolet sponsorship deal didn’t, even though Joel Ewanick was sacked by Chevrolet for negotiating it and signing it off.

The General Motors executive who agreed a record shirt sponsorship deal with Manchester United worth a staggering £175million has been sacked. Global marketing chief Joel Ewanick was axed less than 48 hours after it was announced the Chevrolet badge would be emblazoned on the United shirt from next season.
 
Atom said:
I think you’re missing the point - they’re all related parties, hence the scrutiny. You’re simply emphasising why there’s a widely held theory that the entire purpose of the City ownership is to benefit and project Abu Dhabi onto the world, via football.

Surely we should have hired competent people who could facilitate investment exclusively from non-related parties and remove any doubt as to where the money is coming from.
Click to expand...
Are you 'Atom' Adam Crafton? If so, fuck off, you rag ****.

If not, fuck off, you rag ****.
 
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