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

Be aware that claims of a PL win are linked to this:

He added: "While it is true that MCFC did not succeed with every point that it ran in its legal challenge, the club did not need to prove that the APT rules are unlawful for lots of different reasons. It is enough that they are unlawful for one reason."

In reality the PL ‘wins’ were worthless because City only needed to show the rules were unlawful for a single season. That some of City’s claims of the rules being unlawful were thrown out means absolutely nothing.

Here’s an example:

Haaland has 5 one on ones with the keeper. The keeper saves 4 but Haaland scores 1. To win the game Haaland had to score just 1 of his 5 attempts. The keeper can claim he ‘won’ 4 but ultimately the game goes to Haaland.
 
bluenova said:
The biggest problem with all this won/lost nonsense is the football analogies.

Win 6-5 and you still get all three points. A score draw gives you the same points as a nil-nil.

What we have here is a situation that isn't a football game. Both sides can have some success, even if one has done better than the other.

It's quite possible for City to be pleased because they have won some concessions from the PL, while the PL can be pleased because it could have been a LOT worse.
Click to expand...
It’s being spun as a football match where only the shots off target are significant. City failed with 23 out of 26 shots against Fulham, Fulham only failed with 3 out of 5 so clearly a big win for Fulham
 
Gremlin said:
If I can paraphrase (and shoot me down here if anyone is better informed), it seems to me that the PL 'win' is that the concept of there being rules is lawful. City's win is, however, relates to what those rules actually are.

I know which seems to be the more effective win to me.
Click to expand...
100% thats how I see it, there seems to be this view that we were trying to throw out the whole principle of APT rules, I don't believe that to be the case at all. There needs to be regulation and rules in place however they need to be fair to all parties concerned and most importantly legal.

We felt the amendments pushed through after the Newcastle take over were not fair and legal and as such challenged them. We won, they are having to amend the rules.

The PL are claiming a victory in that the panel agreed there needed to be rules and regulations, I dont believe we ever challenged that.
 
abu13 said:
100% thats how I see it, there seems to be this view that we were trying to throw out the whole principle of APT rules, I don't believe that to be the case at all. There needs to be regulation and rules in place however they need to be fair to all parties concerned and most importantly legal.

We felt the amendments pushed through after the Newcastle take over were not fair and legal and as such challenged them. We won, they are having to amend the rules.

The PL are claiming a victory in that the panel agreed there needed to be rules and regulations, I dont believe we ever challenged that.
Click to expand...
100% this^

Fair and open, that's all we want and deserve nothing more or less.
 
bridgeno1 said:
All I'll say is how incredibly awesome is it that you guys have Stefan Borson on here to give his considered view based on years of expertise. Whilst the 'old man shouting at clouds' type of posts that dominate this thread may be more immediately visceral, facts and opinions based on years of expertise are optimal IMHO.

It's also a reminder to myself to not comment on things I don't know the ins and outs of without expressly stating it's an opinion or hearsay and should be treated as such. Others would do well to follow likewise.
Click to expand...
And that is the entire point, it is HIS considered view and that is all, the fact that he chooses to use an appalling excuse of a radio station which has in the past employed stan collymore and mark goldbridge and currently employs gabby agbonlahor and martin keown to voice that opinion somewhat reduces the veracity of that opinion. I get he is a blue and he knows his onions but that does not make him infallible and his opinions above reproach with the best will in the world if a respected surgeon decided to express his medical opinion in the beano you would have to question why.
 
Ducado said:
As for rival fans and forums, don't take any notice (I know it's hard) because generally they are absolutely clueless most of this is well above their collective heads, they have the lynch mob mentality they don't understand the concept of justice and legality basically it pains me to say this but they are as numb as a box of spanners, and even if they were sat down and had it all explained to them they would still say the same things because it's part of their belief system

As for the media reports people need to remember the strange parasitic relationship the media have with the PL they need each other, hence the media spin in favour of the PL
Click to expand...
Sounds like cultish behavior.
 
Cobwebcat said:
Wasn’t there supposed to be a second case where City could claim compensation? What happened there?
Click to expand...
604. Injunctive relief and damages are also sought. We reserve our jurisdiction to grant such relief. We do not [do] so in this Award because we heard no submissions as to such relief and in any event we consider that the Parties should have the opportunity to consider what, if any, further relief is appropriate in the light of our conclusions.
605. We also reserve all questions of costs.
 
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