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

slbsn said:
All a bit weird - I've been on here for 20 years, on Twitter for 15, writing on these topics for maybe 10 years, podcasts for 10? and watching City since 1982. So I do "it", in a lot of places. And I try and be objective. You do understand that the club are not trying to be objective don't you? It is not their job.
Click to expand...
I listen to you on Talksport just now and I dont understand others here who said that you where unfair to City. Just listen again everyone , this case is not a football match the result was some City won and some PL won , I think City is happy with the verdict that is all that matters , you as usually are my go to guy in this shitshow so keep on with all the good work you do for City fans, I for one am very pleased with everything you say on X, Podcasts and here.
I understand very well what you said and why you said it and what you mean even if English in not my native language. If it wasnt for you I would be completely lost .
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It can be plainly seen from the carefully crafted and worded press release that the PL don’t believe they have won.
Click to expand...
That's what gets me, looking at some of the tweets from the usual suspects...loveable Miguel and Tariq et al, they don't seem to care that some of the basic rules of the PL have been shown to be unlawful and anti-competitive, they seem far more interested in still siding with the PL and decrying City.
I haven't seen them say "it's good that laws deemed unlawful by an independent panel will now be changed", they'd prefer those rules to continue and continue to penalise certain clubs unfairly.
 
SalfordCityBlue said:
This is definitely true... But there is a concern (for us, not so much him as I presume they make it worth his while) that they are using him to say 'look even a City "insider" agrees with us!' to strengthen their attempts to do harm to Man City. That's where the frustration comes from. They have people lining up to eviscerate us, and the only person attempting to be 'fair and reasonable' is the one person they allow on from our side.

When Simon Jordan is doing a better job representing City fans' feelings, something has gone awry. City grabbed the upper hand yesterday, there's no need for us to be magnanimous, because they wouldn't have been magnanimous if they'd been more successful. But I get that means they might not have him on at all.

It's like the Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. When the Republicans are in power they say fuck the Democrats, when the Democrats are in power they say we 'need to reach across the aisle'. It's why one side gets things done and the other side gets bogged down in diplomacy.
Click to expand...

Difference is that SJ's points weren't always referencing the judgment, some were emotive and just happened to be for us this time. In the past his opinions have been emotive and against us.

The issue is when you discuss cases you aren't involved in, it's very hard to be too emotional either way because even though you can have the judgment in front of you, you still don't know what's gone on in the hearing. As a professional operating in that sphere, you have to use the judgment and form an opinion on fact.

Simon Cliff's supposed comments are promising because he was involved and City have felt so bemused that they've had to write a letter to the other clubs. As a professional though without seeing the letter, you can only speculate on that, as a fan it's slightly different.

As fans we can of course celebrate that some of the rules were unlawful and City might be able to seek damages. We can also celebrate the fact that the PL make mistakes and that's promising with the big hearing underway.
 
slbsn said:
In fairness the judgment itself mixes the spellings!
Click to expand...
I also noticed in the recital above the decision on page 164 ‘AND’ was spelt as ‘ABD’! As in ‘HEREBY AWARD ABD DECLARE’.

Unbelievable really, given what’s at stake, the exposure the determination will get and the fact it’s been signed off by both parties!
 
schfc6 said:
PL claiming our letter and content are incorrect. This is going to be a proper war.
Click to expand...

This was their actual response:

The Premier League has also declined to comment, but a senior source has told BBC Sport that it rejects any view that its summary of the ruling was misleading or inaccurate.

Hardly a strong rebuttal.
 
Dannyblue52 said:
Who won? I have been asked at least 6 times today. Purely because the Premier League played it down as a small matter of incorrect rules that can easily be rectified.
My answer was make your own mind up. City can claim compensation for millions. The Premier League have to change their rules as they have been declared illegal. Clubs have to pay interest on loans designed to give them a competitive advantage aka cheating. I KNOW who won!
Click to expand...

The very idea of "winning" in a case like this is a little bit bonkers.
FIFA claimed a "win" the other day about the Diarra case too. Everybody always claims a win all the time. Ultimately there is no winner and loser, theres just some rules to be tweaked and everything carries on as usual.

If people can't accept that winning and losing don't really exist in a case against the PL then they're going to be very annoyed when the 115 judgement comes out. Nobody will win that either, despite both sides claiming that they did.

We are a shareholder of the PL. There is no us and them, there is just us.
 
LangleyBlue1970 said:
Got to be honest, I’m loving it. All this now with us writing to other PL clubs. It’s really quite seismic, and we are the ones pushing it all out.
Click to expand...
The only way out of this mess is for the league to stop the 115 case citing bad actor in masters. Blame the problems at his door, hire a new person and we all move on as if it didn’t happen… city get a seat at the top table and we all go out for a nice civilised kick about -:)

Iv been trying to catch up with this thread now for hrs and still it evades. The news is simply astonishing. Everyone had us down as out of control foreign usurpers that needed to be put back in their place.

Grubby human rights abusers who cheat but in reality this case has shown not only that city are correct; the apt rules are unlawful and against the law but we now find out that the league is infact cheats who happen to be also racists and a protectionist racket.

The league even went so far to lie again to the footballing world about the independent tribunals unequivocally response to the unlawful activities of the league and certain shareholders. Hell we even pointed out the shareholding loans disguised investment.

I am seriously impressed with city today. Although if a deal can’t be sorted before the 115 then the lies and twisting of truth will be off the scale from our dear honest regulator, the premier league.

Well done to City for having the balls to stand up to bullies. Well done to city fans for not only hanging in through this depressing off field period but also galvanising our club with pep to achieve greatness.

Now back to page 1162 -:)
 
Last edited:
SSL2 said:
For starters, you reposted this tweet. So I presume at the time when you reposted, you were in agreement with Tariq?

I've have respected/agreed with you on many points for years now, but in this particular case, I find your stance very odd indeed. Your unwillingness to back down from your viewpoint that city haven't gained any significant victory in this hearing, is just plain bizarre.

Click to expand...

I repost lots of tweets I don't agree too.
 
HelloCity said:
I think it’s more because the view is completely at odds with City’s general council’s position and this is therefore causing some confusion.

From City’s letter (BBC extract)…

"Regrettably, the summary is misleading and contains several inaccuracies," Cliff claims.

"The tribunal has declared the APT rules to be unlawful. MCFC's position is that this means that all of the APT rules are void," the letter states.

"The decision does not contain an 'endorsement' of the APT Rules, nor does it state that the APT Rules, as enacted, were 'necessary' in order to ensure the efficacy of the League’s financial controls."

The Premier League's position that City were unsuccessful in the majority of its challenge is described by Cliff as "a peculiar way of looking at the decision".

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."

Cliff added that it was “not correct that the tribunal’s decision identifies 'certain discrete elements' of the APT rules that need to be amended in order to comply with competition and public law requirements.

"On the contrary: the APT Rules... have been found to be unlawful, as a matter of competition law and public law.
Click to expand...
He did address that though. He said his job was to give his opinion and remain impartial while it was City’s job to be biased and aggressive. I may have misquoted that but that was the gist.
 
HelloCity said:
This was their actual response:

The Premier League has also declined to comment, but a senior source has told BBC Sport that it rejects any view that its summary of the ruling was misleading or inaccurate.

Hardly a strong rebuttal.
Click to expand...
Senior source my arse. Actually I’d rather not reference my arse to the bbc
 
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