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

[Kazzydeyna]

I’m happy to take this as a win, given that I have zero legal training.
I am however, a curmudgeonly cynic and part of me is now worrying that the PL have agreed to this “deal” (and will potentially allow the new etihad deal) as a means of getting City to “agree that APT rules are infact lawful”.
What’s to stop them throwing out our next sponsorship from any business who have employees that once went to the Middle East on holiday, and saying “you agreed this process was lawful so tough” ?

As I say, I’m not a lawyer, just a cynical old man and I do not trust the PL.

 

[TheGhost]

Looking forward to the next release of the Premier League rules hand book PDF.

 

[TinFoilHat]

100% this.
I smell a deal.

If the deal involves the rags being relegated I'm in.

 

[heslops barnet]

Wife beater crying already

****

 

[Burtonblue]

Wife beater crying already

Wrong.
Conclusion is Stan Collimore is a ****!

 

[Revolver]

Colleymores “beloved” Aston Villa’s players have been stating how unfair the current financial rules.

But there’s money and followers to gain by slagging off Manchester City…….

Pathetic

 

[Skrastins]

27 answerphone messages from a very angry Simon Jordan.

First his mate quits then this...

I hope @slbsn is allowed to post them for our merriment

Magic Hat probably harming himself

 

[Keith Moon]

I would say that state-owned organisations from the same country as the owners (e.g. state airlines, banks, telecom companies) are no longer classified as Associated Parties under the APT rules.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Wife beater crying already

His tears taste delicious.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Wife beater crying already

“But, if he thinks he’s going to turn up and outplay everybody in the Premier League, and that teams like Watford, Leicester, Bournemouth, Southampton and Crystal Palace are going to let his Manchester City side have the ball for 90 per cent of the time and pass pretty patterns around them so they can get a result, then he is absolutely deluded.
In fact, he’s beyond deluded.
“And if he thinks he doesn’t need to teach tackling or one-on-one combat in training then he’ll be going back to Spain with his tail between his legs.”
That Stan Collymore?

 

[CC1]

I’m happy to take this as a win, given that I have zero legal training.
I am however, a curmudgeonly cynic and part of me is now worrying that the PL have agreed to this “deal” (and will potentially allow the new etihad deal) as a means of getting City to “agree that APT rules are infact lawful”.
What’s to stop them throwing out our next sponsorship from any business who have employees that once went to the Middle East on holiday, and saying “you agreed this process was lawful so tough” ?

As I say, I’m not a lawyer, just a cynical old man and I do not trust the PL.

I rather think Khaldoon has this covered

 

[wattle]

Ostensibly this is completely separate from the 115 case, but I can't imagine we'd have agreed to drop it if we felt we were about to get fucked over on the 115.

Exactly what I was thinking. It’s pretty inconceivable that we would have agreed to a settlement in this case of we were about to be found guilty in the other

 

[Skrastins]

Can we expect 300m a year Etihad deal? Maybe plus 100m a year Etihad Bank deal

 

[Big Joe Corrigan]

Wife beater crying already

Like you hammered Ulrika Stanloi?

 

[GLBlue1995]

I’m happy to take this as a win, given that I have zero legal training.
I am however, a curmudgeonly cynic and part of me is now worrying that the PL have agreed to this “deal” (and will potentially allow the new etihad deal) as a means of getting City to “agree that APT rules are infact lawful”.
What’s to stop them throwing out our next sponsorship from any business who have employees that once went to the Middle East on holiday, and saying “you agreed this process was lawful so tough” ?

As I say, I’m not a lawyer, just a cynical old man and I do not trust the PL.

If the PL is letting the previously blocked Ethiad and Abu Dhabi bank deals through, it will have a hard time changing course on deals like that for us in the future.

 

[Chappie]

I’m happy to take this as a win, given that I have zero legal training.
I am however, a curmudgeonly cynic and part of me is now worrying that the PL have agreed to this “deal” (and will potentially allow the new etihad deal) as a means of getting City to “agree that APT rules are infact lawful”.
What’s to stop them throwing out our next sponsorship from any business who have employees that once went to the Middle East on holiday, and saying “you agreed this process was lawful so tough” ?

As I say, I’m not a lawyer, just a cynical old man and I do not trust the PL.

Go back and read the statement, the answer to your anxieties is there.

 

[C-E-L-FBlue]

Wife beater crying already

Read ‘SamLFCYNWA’ reply to this, not sure he understands the concept of irony!!

 

[Gundoggin]

This seems that MCFC can carry on with its business model without any further scrutiny from the PL . Deffo a win for MCFC even though we may never see or hear the fine detail.

 

[chaddblue]

Wife beater crying already

Stan Who?

 

[Coatigan]

Monetary compensation plus approval of those sponsorships that were barred previously.
This is just my guess.

That's not how it reads though. Reads more like we are accepting theit position on the current rules, which we were confident in challenging previously.