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

IcriedwhenTueartleft said:
There you go then, that's why the likes of Wolves and Bournemouth sided with the PL...makes sense now
Click to expand...
But will they side with the PL when they know that interest-free loans from an owner will now have commercial rates of interest applied, which may tip them into failing PSR? And will the PL go back and say, well here's what your accounts should've looked like if we'd treated these loans properly?

Also, I've quickly read part of the full report from the panel and it seems the PL had identified that interest-free owner loans could be an issue. But it seems someone (and the name is redacted) 'suggested' excluding these from APT, which is now deemed to be unlawful. I'd like to know who the 'someone' was.
 
Blue and true said:
I'm sure it's already been asked, but can someone help me out? Does this bear well for us in relation to the other charges?

Seems to me the Prem don't know their arse from their elbow and are just trying to damage us reputationally.
Click to expand...
Apart from the fact they had to reduce Everton's points deduction, over reached trying to dock Leicester points and making illegal APT rules, not sure why'd they'd be questioning their master plan going after City following a CAS verdict that said NO EVIDENCE 13 times lol.
 
Colin Bells Boots said:
He is of absolutely no use to us at all. We don't need him, as this outcome clearly demonstrates.

He won't be allowed to continue for long as this a serious and critical decision against the PL and the favoured clubs.

Why should he be paid for being a **** and an incompetent one at that - serious question ?
Click to expand...


I'm asking whether his incompetence helps us with the other case. I worded it badly. I agree we don't need him, but it surely hurts their case against us.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But will they side with the PL when they know that interest-free loans from an owner will now have commercial rates of interest applied, which may tip them into failing PSR?
Click to expand...
Craziest thing to me about all of this is that wasn't ever taken into account in the first place - but we shouldn't be surprised, given the disingenuous nature of the whole endeavor from the outset. Talk about a loophole - how did they not see it?
 
paulchapo said:
Given the damning verdict, especially the three verdicts of unlawful and Tolmie saying the emails they had to hand over were pretty incriminating against them, I would think they'd be on damage limitation mode now. If I was them it would be along these lines:

"Given the recent verdict in the Manchester City case and the failings in our rules and the application of them, we have decided our other case against Manchester City will now no longer proceed.
Manchester City football club leave these proceedings without a stain on their character and we unreservedly apologise to their owners, chairman, manager, players and fans for any distress these proceedings have caused them."
Or words to that effect....
Click to expand...
That would be prudent, but you know it won’t happen. More fun to come.
 
Don Karleone said:
He is. He's also incompetent which helps us. Every other club can get fucked for all care these days.
Click to expand...
His incompetent and weak “leadership” is why we are here to begin with. If he had a backbone, he wouldn’t be so easily influenced by certain clubs/individuals and it’s likely we wouldn’t be facing an existential threat to our very existence.

We don’t want/need his help. He’s not a useful idiot, he’s just a slimy ****.
 
patrickblue said:
90377491-13916133-image-m-16_1727885877348.jpg
Click to expand...
Did Fulhams tight arse owner buy a round at their Christmas doo on expenses?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But will they side with the PL when they know that interest-free loans from an owner will now have commercial rates of interest applied, which may tip them into failing PSR?

Also, I've quickly read part of the full report from the panel and it seems the PL had identified that interest-free owner loans could be an issue. But it seems someone (and the name is redacted) 'suggested' excluding these from APT, which is now deemed to be unlawful. I'd like to know who the 'someone' was.
Click to expand...
Hmmm...I suspect you have a good idea PB!
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
But will they side with the PL when they know that interest-free loans from an owner will now have commercial rates of interest applied, which may tip them into failing PSR?

Also, I've quickly read part of the full report from the panel and it seems the PL had identified that interest-free owner loans could be an issue. But it seems someone (and the name is redacted) 'suggested' excluding these from APT, which is now deemed to be unlawful. I'd like to know who the 'someone' was.
Click to expand...
I’ll give you a hint: their surname rhymes with Bin Kate Sham.
 
Sorry for being ignorant or if its already been discussed as this thread is moving fast.

Will our lawyers be able to use any of todays revelations to discredit the premier league regarding our other court case. haven't seen all the details but what I gather it seems the premier league colluded with certain clubs to make unlawful rules to stop other clubs getting investment. The very same clubs that premier league that are the driving force behind the 115 charges.
 
SalfordCityBlue said:
I presume he means the finding in a nutshell says there's a need for rules to stop ridiculous deals, but the rules have to be lawful and reasonable, which the current and previous ones weren't.
Click to expand...

I get that part and we are willing to do just that, but not if those rules are not only a stitch up but unlawful. We have to challenge them.
 
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