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

[Tim of the Oak]

He wasn't banned for it, he got a yellow card. He was banned for stamping on Van Persie IIRC and he did do it in fairness.

OK then a yellow thanks. The ban was very controversial with the ref having a great view of the incident. Yes it was a stamp but shouldn't have resulted in a re-refereed ban. Especially, when Rooney was getting away with elbowing people in sight of refs.

The key issue is why Arsenal and their fans were not sanctioned,

 

[bluwes]

Simon bajkowski i beieve one of the few half reasonable reporters for the muen

I just spat out a perfectly good glass of Chardonnay.

 

[cityontheup]

Supporters supporting City’s PL challenge.

Newcastle.
Everton.
Forest.
Chelsea.
Villa.

Do the teams coming up have a vote?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Do the teams coming up have a vote?

I would imagine so. Add Leicester to that. Seven clubs ..... Let's have the vote again. Tyranny of the minority :)

 

[cityontheup]

I would imagine so. Add Leicester to that. Seven clubs ..... Let's have the vote again. Tyranny of the minority :)

That’s what I was thinking, give Leicester a vote

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

When this broke, or was leaked as usual last week, that was a phrase I was uneasy with.
However after Stefan’s Talksport spot with Danny Murphy, I got my head around it a lot better.
The Tyranny of the Majority….. hmmm! Anti-democratic?
Well that depends doesn’t it. It is a legal phraseology and really without us seeing the context of where it is referred to in the 165 page document, we should not jump to conclusions, although I have my suspicions as to what it may be referencing.
Majority rule is democratic but not necessarily always just.
You can see where that could be going when having your competitors having the power to make rules that hamper you alone.

I work with many Liverpool and United supporters and at least one Arsenal supporter too. I was off work last week and am expecting a barrage of abuse/banter when I go in tomorrow.

The example of Tyranny of the majority that I plan to use, bearing in mind im Irish working in Dublin goes as follows…. Without wishing to offend any sensibilities in the UK…
We have a long history on this island of although being in the majority as Catholics, being in the minority, represented in parliament. Why? Catholics couldn’t stand for parliament before emancipation. Laws kept in place by a governing majority. Were they just? Well let’s just say, it caused a lot of bother over here for a long time.

Spring forward to an even better example in 1960’s Northern Ireland. There was a Protestant majority in the North and they liked to keep it that way. Even in constituencies that they didn’t necessarily have the majority. Gerrymandering of constituency borders was the order of the day to achieve this goal. Had councils got the majority vote to do this? Yes.
Does it make it right?
Well let’s just say this and the civil rights being undermined in general, caused a spot of bother up there.
Not sure if you noticed or not.

Anyway, like I said, Ive no wish to make anyone uncomfortable with a somewhat political contribution, but it does demonstrate the principle of tyranny of the majority, in my book and hopefully will hit a nerve over here when trying to explain what’s going on.

Incidentally all’s good that ends well. How was the North resolved. By inclusiveness and sincere dialogue (the GFA)

Let’s hope what comes out of this PL/Cartel debacle will be every bit as innovative.

Tyranny of the majority is from John Stuart Mill's work. You're right, in it's original conception it's about the point that "democracy" can still be a threat to "liberty" eg through majority groups voting to oppress opposition or minority groups. I'm surprised it's caused quite as big a drama as it has, I legitimately thought it was a well-known critique of lots of different structures. Was certainly used regularly in relation to the referendum and also in relation to emergent populisms around the world in the last decade. It maybe sounds grand to use about football, but whenever I've seen taught I've seen it used in relation to clubs.

 

[halfcenturyup]

That’s what I was thinking, give Leicester a vote

There is no vote, of course, because it is in arbitration now. The only votes that matter are the three arbitrators.

But yes, if the February APT vote was held now, and those seven clubs voted against, it wouldn't pass.

 

[ufo]

I would imagine so. Add Leicester to that. Seven clubs ..... Let's have the vote again. Tyranny of the minority :)

premier league vs super league?

 

[ganganvince]

There is no vote, of course, because it is in arbitration now. The only votes that matter are the three arbitrators.

But yes, if the February APT vote was held now, and those seven clubs voted against, it wouldn't pass.

But as it has now been passed if it came up at the next meeting to revert to the old rule 14 would be required now to change it.

 

[The Blue Eh]

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.

“But other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?”

 

[halfcenturyup]

But as it has now been passed if it came up at the next meeting to revert to the old rule 14 would be required now to change it.

True, but that's not what I said :)

 

[ganganvince]

True, but that's not what I said :)

I know was just emphasising how hard it is to change the status quo. :) For context we left the EU on 52%

 

[mscenterh750]

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.

Lee Bradbury and Gerry Creaney being fucking wank.

 

[mancboy]

We need a new one for Masters, the PL, United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs. Sound on.

Can do one with the music

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

I know was just emphasising how hard it is to change the status quo. :) For context we left the EU on 52%

Tyranny of the majority.

 

[BrianW]

'Tyranny of the majority' was one of the original, 18th-century criticisms of democracy. As I have grown older, I have come to see what they meant. They were also concerned about the impact of demagogues inflaming the mob. Again, I have come to see what they meant.

Democracy only works properly when you consider the rights of the minority as well. But that's way too sophisticated for 2024.

The Premier League is basically an oligarchy, not a democracy. It is ruled by a small minority of uber-influential clubs backed by their lackeys, The interests of anyone else are ignored.

 

[levets]

I doubt very much City are "challenging" the two-thirds rule. I think they are challenging the APT rules as onerous, discriminatory and unnecessary from a sporting viewpoint.

The reference to voting, I would imagine, is just to support the idea of discrimination. "Tyranny of the majority" after all is a construct in support of the rights of minorities (which is also enshrined in corporate law along with the idea of a two-thirds majority). I think the point is: when you have discriminatory rules, in a conspiratorial environment, the minorities lose out.

And I think City can prove that. I also think the email disclosure requirement will support it (especially as I think it is likely the club already has some incriminating correspondence). Whether that is enough to prove the rules are anti-competitive, we will have to wait and see.

Yes,the ‘Tyranny of the Majority’ refers to the APT amendment solely. The majority voted for a rule amendment which benefits themselves at the expense of just 2 clubs. This is an example of the statement.

 

[Stoned Rose]

'Tyranny of the majority' was one of the original, 18th-century criticisms of democracy. As I have grown older, I have come to see what they meant. They were also concerned about the impact of demagogues inflaming the mob. Again, I have come to see what they meant.

Democracy only works properly when you consider the rights of the minority as well. But that's way too sophisticated for 2024.

The Premier League is basically an oligarchy, not a democracy. It is ruled by a small minority of uber-influential clubs backed by their lackeys, The interests of anyone else are ignored.

My man.

 

[Stoned Rose]

There is no vote, of course, because it is in arbitration now. The only votes that matter are the three arbitrators.

But yes, if the February APT vote was held now, and those seven clubs voted against, it wouldn't pass.

This would suggest all votes should be re-held every summer to see what impact the relegated/promoted clubs have on the outcome.

Bet it doesn’t happen this way though.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Tyranny of the majority is from John Stuart Mill's work. You're right, in it's original conception it's about the point that "democracy" can still be a threat to "liberty" eg through majority groups voting to oppress opposition or minority groups. I'm surprised it's caused quite as big a drama as it has, I legitimately thought it was a well-known critique of lots of different structures. Was certainly used regularly in relation to the referendum and also in relation to emergent populisms around the world in the last decade. It maybe sounds grand to use about football, but whenever I've seen taught I've seen it used in relation to clubs.

No BB. it's not widely known and City dropped a clanger allowing this phrase to be used.