And a lovely distant dreamy ‘what could possibly go wrong in my life’ kind of look.He does have very nice hair.
This is why the APT rules have been found to beAs a Newcastle fan, I questioned this. Say I was a millionaire, or even a billionaire and I wanted to sponsor Newcastle Inited for £50m, and the Premier League said no, but I asked to sponsor Liverpool for that amount and they said yes, surely I have the ability to take action against the Premier League.
To me, giving Newcastle £50m would be worth it. It could buy us a player to compete, or it could be the difference between winning something, and not winning it.
Giving Liverpool that money would mean the opposite, Liverpool likely get that player ahead of Newcastle, and likely go on to win something with that money.
Naturally you all as Man City fans would feel the same about sponsoring Man City.
So who is it for the Premier League to say how I can and can’t spend my money, and how 2 teams who have an equal share in the Premier League are having 2 different limits of funding sources placed on them?
Surely in competition law, there is laws preventing that, as well as the Premier Leagues ‘Everyone is equal, and has equal opportunities’ rules.
I'm not so sure that's right, City are being charged under rule E54, so City are having deals assessed for FMV and it is Neilson who are doing it.
Equality is always based on the principle of those that rule and, although many City fans have been here for many years, it’s good that others are now seeing what has always been happening in the PL.As a Newcastle fan, I questioned this. Say I was a millionaire, or even a billionaire and I wanted to sponsor Newcastle Inited for £50m, and the Premier League said no, but I asked to sponsor Liverpool for that amount and they said yes, surely I have the ability to take action against the Premier League.
To me, giving Newcastle £50m would be worth it. It could buy us a player to compete, or it could be the difference between winning something, and not winning it.
Giving Liverpool that money would mean the opposite, Liverpool likely get that player ahead of Newcastle, and likely go on to win something with that money.
Naturally you all as Man City fans would feel the same about sponsoring Man City.
So who is it for the Premier League to say how I can and can’t spend my money, and how 2 teams who have an equal share in the Premier League are having 2 different limits of funding sources placed on them?
Surely in competition law, there is laws preventing that, as well as the Premier Leagues ‘Everyone is equal, and has equal opportunities’ rules.
He’s not he’s a corrupt **** that’s closer to a pasty than a businessman.Pulling out of talks with broadcasters after the Premier Leagues latest deal stood still, whilst the NFL, and even the EFL all increase theirs?
How is this man a businessman?
Yep. Was ready to give an upbeat review of what the PL was going to do, ready for all the frothers to use in their positive broadcasts of the PL.He’s plopped his pants , and no doubt would have sliced his driver off every tee.
The fucking shithouse.
Eh? A pasty?He’s not he’s a corrupt **** that’s closer to a pasty than a businessman.
Etihad were on their knees at one point having lost a packet on poor acquisitions. So the association with City made up a great deal of lost ground for them and then they…er..took off.All Etihad had to do is point to their exponential growth since 2009, which they credit mostly to their association with Manchester City.
This alone is game, set & match to MCFC. You can't argue with facts & figures... Unless you're the Premier League!
Must be from Cornwall.Eh? A pasty?
I don’t know what any of that means but I’m a few hours into a red wine and thank you for the music powder and I like it.The threshold for a claimant to succeed in Rule X Arbitration is essentially Wednesbury Unreasonableness. That’s a very high hurdle indeed.
It’d seem a bit farcical after all this if the PL have to reassess the Etihad deal, only to decide that it is still above FMV, particularly in the light of the Etihad CEO’s comments today. But that seems quite possible.The threshold for a claimant to succeed in Rule X Arbitration is essentially Wednesbury Unreasonableness. That’s a very high hurdle indeed.
To me, there's a number of elements in assessing fair value:As a Newcastle fan, I questioned this. Say I was a millionaire, or even a billionaire and I wanted to sponsor Newcastle Inited for £50m, and the Premier League said no, but I asked to sponsor Liverpool for that amount and they said yes, surely I have the ability to take action against the Premier League.
To me, giving Newcastle £50m would be worth it. It could buy us a player to compete, or it could be the difference between winning something, and not winning it.
Giving Liverpool that money would mean the opposite, Liverpool likely get that player ahead of Newcastle, and likely go on to win something with that money.
Naturally you all as Man City fans would feel the same about sponsoring Man City.
So who is it for the Premier League to say how I can and can’t spend my money, and how 2 teams who have an equal share in the Premier League are having 2 different limits of funding sources placed on them?
Surely in competition law, there is laws preventing that, as well as the Premier Leagues ‘Everyone is equal, and has equal opportunities’ rules.