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

[Keeper!]

You nail it as usual, Petrusha. I would imagine that if/when we (substantially) win the 115 case then there will be an exodus of PL execs, regardless of an appeal.

Totally agree and why Masters will keep his job until the 115 judgement.

A positive case in favour of the PL in terms of the major charges could even be a get out of jail card for Masters.

 

[Rammy Blue]

No, it just makes me hugely popular, due to my charisma and widely appreciated sense of humour.

I’d have just told him to fuck off, more your style.

 

[JackM]

Four out of 20 in support.....City, Newcastle, Aston Villa and Forrest.

 

[hihosilva]

All of the media outlets basically saying City are celebrating a big win except for Slbsn who's putting a lid on it.
I reckon he's being sitting too often next to those assholes on Talkshite.

 

[Dribble]

This says it all . It's a racket . What other industry deliberately hobbles it's best asset and tries to ruin it's record breaking brand leader in a competitive global market place . The PL will stagnate in a legal swamp, other leagues will dominate and they brought it all on themselves. Deserve everything they get .

If they'd had the sense they were born with they'd have accepted the CAS verdict, but instead they tried to ruin a winning brand with the 115 after City backed the call for an independent regulator , meaning the gloves were off and City has no choice but to go independently legal on the other stuff , exposing shareholder loans exemptions to the harsh light of day . FFP is now being shown up for nothing more than a legally unsound restrictive practice on some clubs and not others .

Who are the cheats now ?

These are the points we as City fans need to keep arguing & hammering home. It does nothing but help the PL & the cartel if we keep engaging them on highly technical levels.

Let's keep giving them simple scenarios to seemingly complex matters, which when stripped down to basics are merely the legacy clubs doing anything in their power to stop Manchester City.

This is getting more ridiculous than a plot from Blackadder.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Ha! I once hugged the doorman at Konspiracy only to feel what i hoped was his gun in his pocket!

I was there the night that kid got stabbed - as was @Didsbury Dave !

Also met someone in the south east a couple of years ago who was there that night too!

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I was there the night that kid got stabbed - as was @Didsbury Dave !

Also met someone in the south east a couple of years ago who was there that night too!

I remember it well. The club went on an extra hour and then everyone had to file out in a giant police lineup.

 

[Vic]

Exactly!

Where City went wrong, was us being too gentlemanly over this fuckin farce, when we should've donned the knuckle-dusters & steeltoe-capped bovver boots & started kicking heads in years ago.

We didn't want to be seen as the ones demolishing the old football world order, but the legacy clubs have been trying to exterminate us out of existence anyway, so looking back we'd have had nothing to lose by burning this corrupt shit down after their first attempts at coming for us!

I couldn't have put forward a more easy to explain analogy than you have, so all the lay people can understand our situation & not have to zone out when all the legal eagles step in getting all technical.

This is why I can see straight through Stefan. Why isn't he making simple, City's situation just like you have? Nah, to do so would be to render him useless to the media, which would hit his professional profile which now reads:

"Represented Manchester City Football Club (years ago). TV & Radio personality who regularly makes "expert" legal contributions on Talkshite & Sly Sports".

Having that on Stefan's CV must be like winning the lottery for him! This is exactly why he tries to suck the hope out of City fans, & daren't hold the media's feet to the fire in defence of City. Why? They'd never ask him back, that's why!

Stefan's also admitted he like everyone outside the process isn't in receipt of the full facts. So the question is, why is he seemingly calling into question the statements made by City's lawyers?

Stefan & others are literally enabling those wanting to see the permanent demise of Manchester City. They should be putting forward analogies like yours, plus keep hammering home the point that we're STILL waiting for the police, HMRC, SFO & Companies House to raid the Etihad as they investigate all the heinous crimes City are alleged to have committed. Where the fuck are they?

Who in the media is asking these most fundamental of questions?

Certainly not those claiming to be City fans.

We know what City say - but we don't know the legal reasoning, or all the evidence, so are guessing at how strong the APT2 case is.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

For me the way to sort out the pig’s breakfast is simply to have no rules at all about the source of funds. Spending can be easily regulated, so the source of funds is completely irrelevant. Is the anchoring proposal just this? If it is, fine, except that in their usual incompetent way, the PL have chosen a bonkers item to act as the anchor, ie the tv revenue of the club with the least.

I agree. Anchoring is definitely a bonkers proposal but at least it has the effect of limiting spend with an upper limit.

But if that's what you want to do, then just come up with an absolute upper limit rather than a relative one. Take the average revenue of the top 5 clubs and use 70% (or some other percentage) of that figure. That means owners can invest freely but there's still an upper limit they can't go beyond.

 

[Carlos- the- jackal]

I was there the night that kid got stabbed - as was @Didsbury Dave !

Also met someone in the south east a couple of years ago who was there that night too!

Was a regular haunt of mine but wasn't there that night, mad days in town then, same with The Thunderdome, happy daze!

 

[slbsn]

Regardless of the reason, that is exactly what you said when this APT case started. I know you're sensitive to being reminded of this from your previous rebuffal to other posters.

Its certainly not trolling, your posts are very much valued by I suspect everyone on this forum, including myself, but perhaps you should try not being so sensitive on a forum for discussion when someone politely points out that your opinion turned out to be wrong.

Not sensitive at all. And I know exactly what I said. You heard what you heard but here is the thing. It is all out there and indeed on this thread. What I said was always couched in likelihood and not certainty. Try and find one time I said City would definitely not win as opposed to it being hard to win and unlikely.

 

[slbsn]

Here is a summary of claims for those interested. FAB our best bet.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Was a regular haunt of mine but wasn't there that night, mad days in town then, same with The Thunderdome, happy daze!

The Thunderdome was another level. Unbelievably intense and edgy. Far preferred places like that to the Haç.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Not sensitive at all. And I know exactly what I said. You heard what you heard but here is the thing. It is all out there and indeed on this thread. What I said was always couched in likelihood and not certainty. Try and find one time I said City would definitely not win as opposed to it being hard to win and unlikely.

Correct, that is what you said, you said you thought it was unlikely City would win, ie a slim chance.

If you bother to read my post again, you will find that I never quoted you as saying City wouldn't win.

Have a good day Stefan.

 

[Rochdale Blue]

My god, the delusion/irony/ and hypocrisy of those comments are off the scale!

I would assume their spite will soon turn towards the tarquins and dippers for destroying football with their interest free loans.

 

[slbsn]

That seems a fair and balanced summary based on what we know. My own view is that Steffan misjudged the strength of feeling that this win would be welcomed by fans - we should enjoy it after all that has been said about our club.
I think you are agreeing with him that the practical implications may not be that great, albeit in its own statement the club used the phrase 'Seismic on many levels' which suggests they feel differently.
I think we should all just enjoy this win while we can, and lets hope the celebrations can continue around 4.55pm this afternoon.

Misjudged assumes I hold a view to satisfy our fans. I don't - I am just giving my view objectively specifically ignoring what the fans think. Lots of people can give you hyperbole without reading the decisions. BTW - where does the club say seismic? Don't think it does.

 

[Dribble]

The APT1 evidence document shows that the PL treated us with contempt. Delay after delay, obfuscation at every stage, doing everything they could to obstruct our sponsorship deals. Whatever the legal machinations this has been bad faith from day one…..and City know this full well. That’s why we have finally gone on the attack.

The only question remaining is why it took us so long to don the knuckle-dusters & steel toe-capped bovver boots & start kicking heads in? We've done ourselves few favours by trying to remain professional & gentlemanly about the witch hunt against us.

 

[Dribble]

The metric is whatever the elite make divided by whatever the elite determine is enough to stymie any threats to them. That's the problem.

Also, yes, Sheikh Mansour tacitly accepted the rules by buying City, but he also expected that they would be compliant with the law. Ian Herbert was saying FSG bought Liverpool on the understanding all clubs would abide by the rules, but he doesn't allow SM the same grace with the law.

Exactly!

 

[slbsn]

Correct, that is what you said, you said you thought it was unlikely City would win, ie a slim chance.

If you bother to read my post again, you will find that I never quoted you as saying City wouldn't win.

Have a good day Stefan.

Unlikely doesn't mean necessarily slim - I don't think I said slim. If you are confirming that I said what I said, I agree. I said what I said.

Not in the slightest bit distancing myself from my initial view based on a single article in the Times. Why would I. Based on the information at the time (ie before we had the initial decision) that was my reasoned view.

 

[Carlos- the- jackal]

The Thunderdome was another level. Unbelievably intense and edgy. Far preferred places like

Me too, The Hac had become cliched by 89:90, to many wannabe gangsters and Pablo Escobars!
Thunderdome was great, like you say edgy and intense, i lived in Collyhurst at the time