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

I do like Stefan’s contributions on Talkshite. We were routinely slaughtered about FFP/FSR before them.

I haven’t seen this week’s TS recordings. I think it comes back to what GDM said many pages back. To oversimplify, if we wanted our pending sponsorships to be treated lawfully and more reasonably, we’ve won. If we wanted to bring down the APT system, then that will need further clarification from the judges. Most of us didn’t think we were going for a knock out to begin with.
 
Last edited:
slbsn said:
Idiotic response.
Talksport give me no guidance what to say and would LOVE me to say the most extreme things imaginable.
Click to expand...
Just listened to you on the 93:20 podcast now I understand what you have been saying and thanks for an excellent explanation of things
I would urge everyone to try and listen, especially those who have a negative view of Stefan. I know it’s behind the paywall but I would like to suggest to you, Stefan @slbsn, that you ask Ahsan to make it available free
 
Last edited:
This definitely feels like an escalation. I don't know if we have a definitive end game other than flexing our weight a little. I don't see us getting APT's and FMV removed from the rules as they are in principle unlawful.

It maybe a case of just drawing a line in the sand and saying "no more taking the Mick". City went along to get along previously but have now decided that they gave an inch and had a mile taken. Feels like a very provocative way of doing that but I guess City will also feel provoked into this course of action. Perhaps this is a play for city to get more influence ie we told you it was unlawful so maybe pay more attention next time.

I did feel from reading the tribunal decision that the lady giving evidence from the premier league seemed very capable and credible. But it also seemed clear that the APT process was rushed and not well conceived from the outset given how quickly it got overwhelmed.

It's seems strange though that the two parties in the arbitration can come away with two very different understanding of what happens next. Would your arbiters not give some guidance?
 
Cheer Up Peter Reid said:
Does anyone know how many deals were reduced in value under the rules, and for which clubs (I can guess which won't be in the list)?

If I was a sponsor, I would probably be quite happy at paying less, so I can't see any deal that was reduced reverting to the original number. So depending on how many such deals there were the PL could be seeing some big demands for compensation.
Click to expand...
WTF! Now that is a VERY VERY good point!

City could've agreed a sponsorship deal at £20m per season above the PL's FMV, but the sponsor ended up paying £20m less per season than originally agreed. If I was the sponsor & City returned saying the PL's FMV was found to be unlawful so can you pay the balance as originally agreed, I'd be telling City 'A deal's a deal mate. I paid as per the final agreed contract, so it's not my problem fella. Go take it up with the PL'.

On this basis yes, I'd think City would have a VERY good case for compensation AND compound interest too. It could go further. Who's to say we couldn't have bid more than £90m for Declan Rice, if this sponsorship money was agreed at the original price, hence why we now have an issue replacing Rodri who's out for the season?

This FMV decision could have caused untold amounts of damage to our business!

This could be the additional litigation that Cliff was alluding to in the email he sent to the 19 PL clubs.
 
Gordyola said:
Just listened to you on the 93:20 podcast now I understand what you have been saying and thanks for an excellent explanation of things
I would urge everyone to try and listen, especially those who have a negative view of Stefan. I know it’s behind the paywall but I would like to suggest to you, Stefan, that you ask Ahsan to make it available free
Click to expand...
Some of the responses to Stefan have been beyond ridiculous. I've not always agreed with what he says by a long chalk but then he's coming from the viewpoint of a lawyer first and foremost and I'm looking at it as a Blue only. I can only think that the worst culprits (calling him outright a **** for instance) are posted by either intellectually sub-par individuals or 12 year olds (or both).
 
spacecadet said:
Have we still got the cheating bastards on the run? Why have just 6 of the shitehawks been selected to discuss with Nandy?
Click to expand...
Because it's nothing to do with this case, I think it's mainly about the money flowing downwards through the pyramid. Wasn't the temporary measured blocked by certain clubs so they're still trying to come to some sort of consensus? There are clubs from the lower leagues there as well.
 
slbsn said:
Idiotic response.
Talksport give me no guidance what to say and would LOVE me to say the most extreme things imaginable.
Click to expand...
I often find myself listening to you being frustrated with how reasonable you are. You're honest when you don't know something and you're not afraid to tell people to calm down. Do better
 
Dribble said:
Agreed 100%. It was David Gill who turned the UEFA football governance talks from stemming debt, to stopping investment. They can claim it was just coincidence that City became the richest club in the world 12 months previously, all they want. We know exactly what Gill's game was.

Too much water has passed under the bridge, & I for one will never trust any of the Red Top Mafia or the PL in its current guise. We've got all the evidence we need to show that self governance doesn't work.

The quicker IREF is introduced, the better for English football.
Click to expand...

But the MP in control will also be a factor if the government gets involved, How can you truth the government when Billions of pounds are involved, Money is the root of all evil and it will make him or her big money and then they will get out as quickly possible, Elections will be held every 2 seasons and a new head selected and the shit will fall on somebody else's shoulders
 
Gordyola said:
Just listened to you on the 93:20 podcast now I understand what you have been saying and thanks for an excellent explanation of things
I would urge everyone to try and listen, especially those who have a negative view of Stefan. I know it’s behind the paywall but I would like to suggest to you, Stefan, that you ask Ahsan to make it available free
Click to expand...
Mate I pay for my subscription out of my own money. If he makes it available for free I've lost out and how can other podcasts compete. Keep owner investment out of podcasts
 
spacecadet said:
Have we still got the cheating bastards on the run? Why have just 6 of the shitehawks been selected to discuss with Nandy?
Click to expand...
It stinks, there's a meeting next Thursday of all Prem chairs.... surely she should to at least look fair and competent either attend that meeting or have one before or afterwards while everyone is together.
 
Bez said:
I'm glad Stefan is out there offering a relatively balanced view of what are very complex legal and political issues. Imagine a situation where Talksport got a biased Liverpool fan on instead. Stefan is one of only a few people out there offering balance and objectivity via the media.

Remember, Khaldoon says he wants to deal in facts. That is exactly what Stefan does.

It must be a difficult gig going on TS when Simon Jordan could jump in any second to derail your flow of argument with his usual show boating.

Stefan is being invited on as an FFP expert. That's what he's doing.
Click to expand...
This is my stance. I can understand some CITY fans wanting him to go all gung-ho - a bit like Buzzer did on SKY - but how credible would that make him look.

He has said that he is not there as CITY's formal representative and he is choosing not to act as a cheerleader - this is probably why he gets asked back.

I can imaging that he will does or will start to prepare the 2 or 3 key statements that he thinks should be put out there and makes sure that he achieves that in each appearance.

Some posters have been mentioning the change in Jordan recently / this week. Why do people think that is? I would suggest that he has felt the need to tone down his bollocks in the face of steady facts - calmly stated by a credible person.

It will be good for CITY loving fans to see him being invited back to temper the bollocks spouted by the vast majority of red-top loving media people.
 
I've listened to Stefan a number of times, but didn't catch the most recent appearance, as I dont listen to TS as much as I used to. Despite me disagreeing with his stance on whether City came out as overall winners in their challenge in the APT rules, this is just a minor difference of opinion and the proof of the pudding will be in the final judgement and implications for the league in general. That said, it is clearly very good to have someone providing balance on a show which has clearly had it in for us from the start.

I like the debate on this forum and most definitely his contributions. It makes you think outside the box, which perhaps we all need at times to stop us becoming too blinkered.
 
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