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

bridgeno1 said:
Whether they do or not I don't know. But there's a difference between a club's hierarchy and its fans. I've been getting dogs abuse on here (it's fine I'm thick skinned and I'm on a Man City forum after all so it's a case of Alice isn't in Kansas any more) but I'm not a representative of Arsenal Football Club I'm just a fan and have been my whole life so I think it would be cool if people could make that distinction. Making things personal isn't cool.
Click to expand...
"Alice, Alice, who the fuck is Alice?"

You mean Dorothy numb nuts.
 
1728348484630.png1728348515758.png1728348544856.png

giphy.gif
 
slbsn said:
They will have to. No real option
Click to expand...

They will have to have new votes continually weakening APT and / or PSR until a vote does pass. Finally, if no vote passes, Masters will have to resign.

The tyranny of the minority. Let's see how strong this "coalition" of seven clubs actually is.

In practice, though, they won't be proposing a vote unless they have the pledges for it to be successful, probably with a little horse trading. But they have to do something, and quick, obviously.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
You have to ask why, and whether the PL made a full disclosure of the background, and the legal advice, to its members before the vote? Or did a little cabal keep that to themselves?
Click to expand...

I was a little surprised that the award mentions the various committees involved in the preparation of rules, including APT, but doesn't say which clubs' legal representatives are involved at what stage, unless in the final APT committee when it was mentioned that City and Newcastle were involved.

It's not that the clubs were redacted, they just weren't named. You would think in a case about discrimination, that information would be relevant. A little less than completely transparent.
 
@slbsn If you are still here, what happened to the 2024 change in respect of burden of proof? It was mentioned in the award, but then the panel only concluded on "pricing" issues (could for would, normal market conditions and removal of evidently - all found for City) and timing issues (found for the PL), but unless I missed it, there was no conclusion on burden of proof?

Like I say, I may have missed it - I am getting old. I would have thought that would be caught up in the "increased likelihood of false positive" narrative applied to the pricing issues but I couldn't see a conclusion on that either way.
 
Last edited:
The PL stated that loans given by directors did not have to be declared for PSR. This helped Arsenal and others comply with the rules.
It's now been ruled illegal and the PL state it only counts from now and will not be backdated.
If it's unlawful and has been for 3 years, how can they just ignore the loans ? That in itself sounds unlawful. In other words they've failed PSR for 3 years.
Further, even if it starts from now, I assume Arsenal will have to declare any outstanding loans and could therefore he in deep shit. Can anyone enlighten me.
 
This really is a stupid post condemning one of our own. Don’t you think the way Stefan approaches things is symptomatic of the way the club does? He relies on facts, logic and professionalism. Do you want him to sink to the level of the thick fanboys of the redshirts? The media is littered with them.
Instead of being nasty to him you should be applauding him for raising the level of intelligent debate in arenas that are hostile to us.
 
Blue Mist said:
The PL stated that loans given by directors did not have to be declared for PSR. This helped Arsenal and others comply with the rules.
It's now been ruled illegal and the PL state it only counts from now and will not be backdated.
If it's unlawful and has been for 3 years, how can they just ignore the loans ? That in itself sounds unlawful. In other words they've failed PSR for 3 years.
Further, even if it starts from now, I assume Arsenal will have to declare any outstanding loans and could therefore he in deep shit. Can anyone enlighten me.
Click to expand...
I doubt it. It's about ten to five in the morning. Most of the cunts on here are in bed.
 
halfcenturyup said:
They will have to have new votes continually weakening APT and / or PSR until a vote does pass. Finally, if no vote passes, Masters will have to resign.

The tyranny of the minority. Let's see how strong this "coalition" of seven clubs actually is.

In practice, though, they won't be proposing a vote unless they have the pledges for it to be successful, probably with a little horse trading. But they have to do something, and quick, obviously.
Click to expand...

You’d imagine the only reason for Masters staying is to be the figurehead for the whole fall out. He can’t survive after this shitshow but with 115 still to be resolved he gets the full lot on his CV.
 
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