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

halfcenturyup said:
There are other rules in place to prevent clubs entering into crazy contracts on anything other than arm's length. These APT rules are completely unnecessary in reality, especially as there has never been a case of sponsorship that has been so out of line with fmv that it raised eyebrows (the nearest possibly being the original Etihad contract but that later turned out to be good value).
Click to expand...
Didn't the rags deal with Chevrolet raise the "wrong" eyebrows - but plenty of them in areas of Manchester?!
 
salfordbluetrue said:
Thank you, you do not know know just how much this has been rattling around in my head.
So this news may be an indication that the PL want to dump, but the proof of the pudding is still the change of the rule book.
The first thing i would do in this situation is stop all usage and stop miss use that could come back and bite me ie access to the data base, until all outcomes have been reached.
Click to expand...

I don't think this news (the withdrawal of the proposed changes today) means anything at all, but it's interesting to speculate.

One thing I do know is that the obviously PL sponsored message that Items are frequently withdrawn from the agenda at the last minute is complete bollocks. Having spent a number of board level years preparing and distributing papers for discussion at various meetings, I can tell you that if you send papers to board members so all these busy and "important" (in their eyes, at least) people can prepare for a meeting and then frequently withdraw items, you wouldn't be doing it very long.
 
skillman said:
‘At considerable expense’ - daft bastard, isn’t he?

If it’s true what he’s saying - which is a big ‘if’ - then having any type of win over the PL while the 115 hearing rumbles on is priceless.

Fuck ‘considerable expense’!
Click to expand...

What a cock, moneys no object :)
 
mac said:
I noticed a report on talkshite this morning saying the Premier League has had to pay around 50 million on legal fees I think over the last 2 years. It seemed a bit strange but I thought they are trying to get sympathy and paint us as Evil City .
Click to expand...

I wonder if Panja will tweet when we’ve won that the premier league have failed at great expense.
 
PL bullshit / propaganda machine swings into operation as it appears that City have put a spoke into the wheels of one of their cunning plans to appease and/or advantage the redshirt cabal.

Hopefully this is the correct interpretation of their hastily arranged change to the meeting today with the PL chairmen.

Sky Sports pet ape Kaveh Sokohol delivers his sombre and deliberate message to the watching fuckwit supporters of all the bitter and trophyless clubs now trailing in City's wake.
 
kearsley blue said:
Click to expand...

3o7TKx9IHKtbtSo3Mk.webp
 
We don't know in any detail precisely what City challenged with regard to APT and it's fairly clear that there has been no ruling. City can't/won't comment and Lawton, Keegan and Panja say only that City appear to have won a victory, significant or otherwise, or seem to have failed in their challenge. Panja seems to suggest failure on both APTs and rule making, which Khaldoon described as the tyranny of the majority (or some such phrase). It does not "seem" that all three have any real idea of what a ruling says. Much seems to rest on the pulling of the proposal to amend the regulations at the PL meeting today but the significance of this is unclear and a subject of controversy: interpretations seem to range from a victory to City to Stefan's contention that it could just as easily mean a clear victory for the PL. Anything is possible. We shall have to wit and see ... if the ruling is ever made public.
 
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