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

deano ou812 said:
Surprisingly Jordan now saying PSR rules are a disgrace,after he originally supported them and if the premier league lose on the 115 then the the premier league board have to go ..
Click to expand...

Ha ha nothing he says would surprise me. He will swap sides to whoever he thinks is winning, particularly if it may mean some litigation could be heading his way.
 


screen-shot-2013-08-29-at-12-50-30-am.png
 
Talksport is just theatre. The presenters take opposing viewpoints even if they don't agree with them personally. They're not even consistent with them day-by-day

It's much more worthwhile to ignore all the noise coming from Simon Jordan and Jim White, and hearing what the only qualified person in the room has to day. Even if it's not exactly what you want to hear

Or better yet, just switch it off altogether
 
Really_here said:
from the BBC

'Concerns that clubs could be hit with additional costs'​

BBC News sports editor Dan Roan
Both sides are claiming victory, and in truth the judgement contains something for both City and the Premier League.
League sources are emphasising the fact that most of City's challenges to the APT rules failed, and that the wider system was endorsed by the panel.
They also seem confident that the rules will be swiftly amended by the clubs within two weeks in order to make them lawful.
But the panel's ruling that the exclusion from the rules of interest-free loans from owners to their clubs (shareholder loans) was unlawful, has led to concerns that clubs could now be hit with additional costs that they were not anticipating.
This could mean some are in danger of breaching PSR regulations. The suggestion is that such loans will now be subject to commercial market rates of interest.
That could have major ramifications for those clubs that owe tens (or even hundreds) of millions of pounds to their owners.
The Premier League seems relatively relaxed about that issue, along with speculation that City and other clubs could seek compensation for any losses suffered by the rules.
On shareholder loans, league officials believe a fair market value analysis of such borrowings would be placed on the cost of the loan (i.e. the interest rate), not the value of the loan itself, and that the impact on clubs, therefore, would be minimal.
They also feel that such loans will only come into the scope of APT once the rules are amended, and will not be applied retrospectively, so only future loans will be affected.
However, BBC Sport has learned that City’s lawyers believe that not subjecting previous shareholder loans to a Fair Market Value assessment (while continuing to apply it to previous sponsorship deals) would be unfair, and that they may seek an injunction to prevent the Premier League from doing so.
But there will be fears from some in the game that any weakening of APT rules designed to preserve fairness and competitive balance could lead to certain clubs being able to sign more lucrative commercial deals.
There is also the question over whether this could have an impact on the 100-plus charges the league has brought against City for alleged financial rule breaches. City deny wrongdoing, and a hearing into the case continues.
Whatever the consequences, what is clear is that this dispute has reinforced the sense of division among the clubs over the financial regulations they are subject to.
Click to expand...
It is clear from the garbled nonsense written by the **** that is Dan Roan that the whole of the BBC sports department are not for for purpose and need to be fucked off as soon as possible.

I further suggest the BBC send all the current written nonsense from their sports department to the BBC Verify department, where it will be clear they are not in any aspect reporting on the actual facts of the written tribunal findings of the IC and as stated previously, fuck off their whole sports department.

They are our national broadcaster and should write from a neutral point of view at all times and report the ‘actual’ news completely independently and without prejudice, this is clearly not the case…
 
Last edited:
alexmcity said:
Slamming Stefan is wrong, but pointing out that he wasn't right to be restrained or pessimistic about particular outcomes is perfectly legit.

If he understands what's really happening, then, maybe, he shouldn't be sitting on the fence.
Click to expand...

I am not sure anyone understands what's really happening at the moment, including @slbsn but, if Cliff's letter is anything to go by, it seems the club doesn't think it has finished with APT just yet.
 
deano ou812 said:
Surprisingly Jordan now saying PSR rules are a disgrace,after he originally supported them and if the premier league lose on the 115 then the the premier league board have to go ..
Click to expand...
Yep. Strange he’s creeping away from his usual outright condemnation of City
 
brazilians hurt said:
You would think! Fallout is coming with the first glimpse will be at next weeks emergency PL meeting. I assume Sorriano is already rehearsing or perhaps the big gun might feel it necessary to attend
Click to expand...

If I was Soriano I’d turn up in full city kit, face full of blue face paint, Helen’s bell in one hand and a pint of Mary D’s finest in the other.
 
I reckon this decision is the equivalent of us winning 3-1 with the opposition scoring in injury time which makes the scoreline look closer. Everyone who went to the match knows it was a stroll, those watching on MOTD see it as a close game and one in which the opposition if they had scored from the other two shots they had all game would have drawn whilst not mentioning the fact we had 71% possession, 12 corners to one and 26 shots to three.
 
Longdarnit Blue said:
Only in this country can the media report the opinion of the losing side as fact rather than quote the actual findings of the tribunal. Perhaps it’s the fantasy age we live in where the premier league can self identify as winners and proclaim ‘their truth’.
Click to expand...

Same happened after the CAS hearing that cleared us. Media and opposition fans cherry picked the bits they liked and decided to ignore the final judgement. Oh and accuse the judges of taking bribes.

The PL version of events is what they want to hear. It comforts them.
 
Presume until the new rule is written and agreed, no one will be sure what the ramifications are?
 
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