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

cheekybids said:
You will but let’s compare that stat & I’ll let you choose the period. 5 years or 50 years you’ll get the same discrepancy.
Click to expand...
But you are comparing us and United which wasn't the original point. You can have a different argument over if you believe United are favoured at different times and you probably wouldn't be far wrong. That isn't what I said though.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
I always defer to your superior knowledgeable on all matters re football finance and legislation. But I'm baffled by your assertions re APT and 115. The only difference is 115 was a retrospective attempt to illegitimise the Etihad sponsorship and ATP is an attempt to illegitimise or throttle any future Etihad sponsorship. It's the PL strategy, as Master's has stated in public, he believes Etihad and City are part of a 'regime', and regimes come and go. He believes that constantly attacking the Etihad sponsorship will make the 'regime' go away. I don't see why you don't also see the 'deep interaction' (nice phrase btw).
Click to expand...
Are the actual cases linked (or have a deep interaction) though? We could “win” one and “lose” the other.

Depends what people mean.
 
mancboy said:
The baffling thing they dont seem to fathom is city have won 6 out of the last 8 pls so have been dominant in supposedly the biggest football league in the world, the press cant stop talking about us even tho its mostly negative its still city, city, city, we have one of the most recognised footballers in the world playing for us who is central to nike and beats global marketing campaigns in city blue not to mention one of the most recognised managers in the world banging our drum all the time, its hilarious how myopic football fans that they dont understand that global companies dont give a fuck what dave from barnsley thinks or what the daily mail says and that city are gigantic and talked about across the world and that has value across the board and if they are too stupid to see it then more fool them but that is why our ceo is doing trillion dollar deals with world superpowers and their co owner is firing janet the dinner lady to save a 100 quid a week, theres levels to this and they arent on ours.
Click to expand...
I know only a small sample but I was in Jamaica last month and literally everyone is a city fan. Every worker in the hotel was and on every trip we did there were city shirts everywhere. Every taxi driver was. The geezers running the dolphin park were. You’d see some mad little random Rasta climb out of the bushes on some secluded roadside in an old school city top.

Irie.
 
mancboy said:
if herbert is saying that, we defo have come out on top, the man doesnt know his arse from his elbow
Click to expand...
This sentence said it all for me:

"The deluded who rage against controls, claiming to be the victims of some phantom 'red cartel', neglect to remember that English football has always been built on the primacy of competition"

Is the guy so deluded that he can't see how a club like Man Utd with their fanbase and attendances are financially in a stronger position than Bournemouth or Brentford?

Is he blissfully unaware of how John Moores bankrolled Liverpool to success in the 70s and 80s, Robert Maxwell bankrolled Oxford United to the first division and Elton John with Watford (inc FA Cup) in the 80s, or Jack Walker with Blackburn and John Hall with Newcastle in the 90s or Abramovich with Chelsea in the 00s.

These APT & PSR rules would have prevented all of that.
 
Cobwebcat said:
Are the actual cases linked though. We could “win” one and “lose” the other.
Click to expand...
How could that ever be possible, so eg the sponsorship between 2010 and 2019 was illegitimate and therefore all the relevant accounts were false, but don't worry everything is fine now, off you go, a record breaking deal for 2024-2034 is absolutely fine, nothing to see here...
 
TedofChume said:
This sentence said it all for me:

"The deluded who rage against controls, claiming to be the victims of some phantom 'red cartel', neglect to remember that English football has always been built on the primacy of competition"

Is the guy so deluded that he can't see how a club like Man Utd with their fanbase and attendances are financially in a stronger position than Bournemouth or Brentford?

Is he blissfully unaware of how John Moores bankrolled Liverpool to success in the 70s and 80s, Robert Maxwell bankrolled Oxford United to the first division and Elton John with Watford (inc FA Cup) in the 80s, or Jack Walker with Blackburn and John Hall with Newcastle in the 90s or Abramovich with Chelsea in the 00s.

These APT & PSR rules would have prevented all of that.
Click to expand...
Been reading Bluemoon hasn’t he. The “red cartel” bit gives it away, the ****.
 
mancboy said:
empirical evidence states that decisions not given for city are given for other clubs, thats not a conspiracy theory that is a statement of fact, if you want evidence of that you only have to look at this season, oscar bobbs foot stamped on by spurs player completely ignored and we play on, chelsea players foot stamped on by fulham player penalty given and even worse chelsea players foot stamped on by fulham player in completely natural act, goal disallowed for fulham.

I know it is de rigeur for people who support the refs to say there is no conspiracy theory and it all equals out in the end but the reality is that is just not the case and it is a statement of fact that certain teams are reffed differently than others and there is any number of incidents to prove that as shown above.
Click to expand...
Evidence, or do you mean your opinion? The same way a different fan will believe they get less decisions than City. Easy example, I was away when we played Wolves. Watching in a bar. I felt some decisions were going against us but nothing drastic. The Wolves fan in there was going ballistic, claiming big team bias and you could clearly hear the Wolves fans on tv feeling like City was being favoured by the ref. Your example is not a City thing is it, you have clearly proved that what may have gone for Chelsea went against Fulham?

I do not support refs at all, I think they are shit and a waste of space. I don't think it evens out because it is impossible to say but you have clearly proved my point by only listing decisions that you believe (opinion not fact) have gone for other clubs and not for City. That is simply the inconsistency of the very poor refs we have in our country who are incompetent. Whilst casually ignoring Traffords handball outside of the area (same as Henderson before you mention that one) that was ignored and we kept 11 men on the pitch when maybe we shouldn't against Spurs. Swings and roundabouts, not entirely even, but some will go for you, some against.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
How could that ever be possible, so eg the sponsorship between 2010 and 2019 was illegitimate and therefore all the relevant accounts were false, but don't worry everything is fine now, off you go, a record breaking deal for 2024-2034 is absolutely fine, nothing to see here...
Click to expand...

If the new deal is waved through as FMV, the argument of “well you’re only worth this much as you cheated / inflated your way to your current value” clearly goes out the window.

To then be found guilty of inflating previous sponsorships would be Olympic levels of mental gymnastics.
 
Very rough & basic summary of events:

- City submitted a sponsorship update for their deal with Etihad which was to be reviewed in line with the PL's APT rules.
- This submission was rejected after an overly long delay.
- City subsequently challenged the APT rules - I believe this was newer amendments.
- The challenge was successful against the amendments, however there was a dispute on if the entirety of the rules had been declared 'null & void' or not.
- The PL put through a new set of APT rules.
- It was confirmed the entirety of the APT rules, not just the amendments, were declared 'null & void' - this was not the new rules but the set City had challenged previously.
- It was confirmed City were challenging the new set of APT rules which they also believed to be unlawful.
- City & the PL come to a settlement - I believe this will result in City having their Etihad sponsorship confirmed and potentially gain compensation as a result of lost earnings.
 
According to The Times, the Premier League assured City that they will not be treated differently compared to other clubs when agreeing sponsorship deals with companies containing ties to their Abu Dhabi-based owners.

The newspaper reports that City will now be free to extend its lucrative commercial partnership with United Arab Emirates (UAE) state-owned airline Etihad Airways, with the new contract potentially worth as much as UK£1 billion (US$1.35 billion). That is said to represent a major uplift on the previous agreement, which was signed in 2011 and worth UK£400 million (US$542 million) over ten years.
 
thegoatsthegoat said:
Not sure what more I can do then. I support City, I do not believe we are hard done to by refs (anymore)
The OP claims we always get shafted by refs and we are treated unfairly. I disagree, whilst also stating that if you spoke to any fan, of any club they will tell you the same about their club. So apparently every ref has it in for every club. Funny that
Click to expand...

Arsenal fans online tend to think there's a red card vendetta against them.

Liverpool fans point to Rodris 'handball' against Everton and say we get everything.

Every team does moan. Every team has fans that are incredibly one-eyed and see any 50-50 decision that goes against them as proof of bias.

Not saying we don't get shit decisions, we do. They aren't always because of who we are though.
 
The PL judge or have been judging a related party to city was any company in the middle east, i reckon that has changed to be the same as everybody else, ie USA owned clubs aren't questioned if an american company sponsors them.

Maybe there was something in those emails that might of made the PL decide better to let city have what they want and think fair than something coming out that made the PL look bent.

Just a thought.

Also got a feeling this has something to do with the 115 in a round about way, no proof ,no qualifications to back it up, just a feeling ive had since this case started.
 
No One Understands said:
Ok.
Didn't realise i had struck a nerve there.

The pants comment was meant in jest. Was something a primary teacher used to say to us, and for some reason it stuck over the years.

Maybe i should have finished with an LOL instead of FOMO ("fear of missing out", in case there was any confusion).

Either way, I'll leave well enough alone. No point in both of us being miffed at the other.
Enjoy the rest of your day as well, good sir.
Click to expand...
I didn't intend it to sound the way you've taken it to sound. Re the pant comment, I agree with you, hence my remark about not having heard it in a long time. Have to admit; I had to google FOMO, as I hadn't come across it before.
 
mancboy said:
fmv as a concept will still never work because and this is the key to basic economics, no outside body can set the market value of anything, the market sets the value itself thats just how economics works, the value of something is what someone is prepared to pay for it and that will always hold true.
Click to expand...
FMV is basically a calculation based on similar transactions with a tolerance ie historic market value and possibly subsequent market value. However, the UEFA method and EPL method of calculating it are different, as they reveal different outcomes. Neither are disclosed so we really don't know what they consider.

FMV also exists in the private sector under competition law, and the way this is calculated appears to be more lenient yet rarely tested. So as a concept FMV is accepted.

You are right in saying it's bull***t and will never work fairly, but not necessarily for the reason given. The reason it is bull***t, like a lot of processes, is simply because it is not transparent, and seems to be made up as they go along.
 
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