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

Cobwebcat said:
Hang on Blues.

Jordan is doing his job by flip flopping his opinions and creating controversy.

@slbsn is doing his job by sticking to the facts.

Just because Jordan is on City’s side today means nothing tomorrow.

It might look like Stefan isn’t pushing City’s win but if Simon wasn’t so pro our position this morning Stefan’s position wouldn’t look anything other than it always has…balanced.
Click to expand...
You can't be balanced in a situation like this. It wasn't a score draw, how can a draw be claimed when they've found to be unlawful? Jordan I think spouts his mouth off before looking at the facts, when he takes the time to look at said facts he tends to draw the right conclusion. If he was stubborn and stuck to a narrative no matter the evidence then he'd be called out for that. I admire somebody being able to backtrack when looking at all the facts. He plays down the 115 an awful lot too these days, probably after doing his own research. Stefan seems to have a stubbornness because he was wrong originally and has played everything down ever since.
 
Keeper! said:
"attempt to destroy the APT rules"


Not true, I would imagine the last thing our execs want is Newcastle and Co getting a blank cheque
Click to expand...
Does it matter if they do?
We had one in 2008 and it took us four years to win the PL, and only just
The rags that said to me in 2008 that you can't just go out and buy a team were spot on, as they have been proving for the last eleven years
 
SilvaisSkyBlue said:
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…
Click to expand...
The BBC has still not reported the Judges’ comments. Their entire story is based on a false narrative put out by the PL Comms team. Next week’s meeting of the clubs will prove how badly the BBC has misjudged the story. The funniest quote from Roan is “The PL is relaxed about the result” Really!
 
John Wayne said:
All of this talk of us being cheats and financially doping, yet all the while we have teams disguising equity investment as interest-free loans that don't need to be repaid.
Click to expand...
These 'interest free' loans to some P/L clubs.
Would that be apr or compound interest?
 
The biggest positive we should take from the aggressiveness of City’s response - in particular the leaked email from Simon Cliff - is there is no way we would be going in this hard if we weren’t absolutely certain of winning the 115 case.

That’s the big story here imo.
 
Dribble said:
So the long & short of it is (by my understanding) is, the PL brought in APT to stop sponsor companies associated to a clubs' owner, from agreeing inflated sponsorship deals as a way of getting money to the affected clubs through the back door. The thinking being this would unfairly distort the transfer market.

From City's viewpoint, we argued that the way APT's are judged is unlawful, because the PL adjudicate what they view as fair market value sponsorships, based on a database of previous sponsorship deals. HOWEVER, if a club disagrees with the PL's decision, they're NOT allowed access to the sponsorship database to challenge the decision.

On top of this, director loans aren't included in APT or PSR. Director loans currently held by Arsenal & others are interest free / very low interest, so City effectively argued why weren't these loans also considered to be a backdoor way of funding certain clubs. The independent review body found in our favour on these points.

It was also found that the amount of time the PL took to adjudicate against City regarding the Abu Dhabi bank & Etihad deals (2 & 3 months respectively) was unreasonably long, & found in City's favour in this respect.

City also alleged that these rules were created specifically to target owners from Gulf States, but the panel ruled in favour of the PL.

In terms of the legality of APT itself, the panel found it to have a legal basis, but with serious flaws with how it was constructed.

This is what's led to both sides claiming victory. APT remains, but must be amended so City & others can review the sponsorship database, & the PL must also include director loans in APT. OR the PL can scrap the lot & try coming at us with something else.

This is my short form understanding of the situation.
Click to expand...

**UPDATE**​


Screenshot_20241008_113045_Gallery.jpgScreenshot_20241008_112706_Chrome.jpg

"In an astonishing, unprecedented move which further underlines the civil war that has broken out in English football, the champions have accused league bosses of ‘misleading’ sides by providing ‘inaccuracies’.

In the message, seen by Mail Sport, City’s general counsel Simon Cliff says bluntly: ‘regrettably the (league’s) summary is misleading and contains several inaccuracies’.

‘Of even greater concern,’ Cliff adds, ‘is the Premier League’s suggestion that new APT rules should be passed within the next 10 days.

'When the Premier League consulted on and proposed the original APT Rules in late 2021, we pointed out that the process (which took several weeks) was rushed, ill-thought-out and would result in rules that were anti-competitive. The recent Award has validated those concerns entirely.’

Cliff informs clubs that the panel found APT rules, aimed at preventing clubs from agreeing inflated deals with companies linked to their owners, unlawful and that, contrary to the top-flight’s comments, the decision renders all of the rules ‘null and void’."

Essentially, APT is legally unenforceable... Looks like the gloves are off! Lol :-)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...tml?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubutton
 
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...
Absolutely, Stefan's original stance was that we were highly unlikely to achieve any significant success, he's been proven wrong on this and there's no harm in him admitting this.
He did say that his opinion at the time was without knowing what city had to bolster their case,which to me suggest he should have sat on the fence then and came off it now.
Unfortunately he seems to have done things the other way round.
 
BobKowalski said:
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.
Click to expand...
They are all ignoring the Judgement just like they did at CAS. Totally bizarre. This is what happens in a post-truth society.
 
Bluearmy said:
To be fair to him, He actually said it would be very difficult to prove with the limited info he had at the time. More info is now out but he didnt have access to that at the time of his original comments…
Click to expand...
So he could come out and say he was wrong and City have had a win here. Calling it a draw is absolute nonsense.
 
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