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

Don't understand this at all. If we are in the right we shouldn't have settled. Or do we not give a fuck about fairness so long as we get our Etihad deal approved?
 
mancboy said:
How are factual incidents my opinion, i have shown two exact same challenges being treated entirely differently, thats not my opinion its right there?
Click to expand...
They are your opinion because no two incident is the same. They can be similar but people will argue the point on both side of things. Ultimately, Chelsea getting some decisions against Fulham, and Fulham feeling harshly treated, has got fuck all to the with the OP who claimed City are harshly treated every week and shafted I thin the word used was. It highlights inconsistences in the game and incompetent referees.
 
cheekybids said:
I backed up my argument by using a small sample over 50 years. Your defence is nobody gets treated the same as the Rags so I’ll widen my sample to now include the Dippers…..
Click to expand...
Still creating a new argument, are you not bored. THE OP SAID CITY ARE SHAFTED EVERY WEEK. What has that got to do with United or Liverpool? I replied saying most fans feel the same about their club and ultimately it isn't true. If you want to create a new and different argument that Liverpool and United get favourable treatment, be my guest, there won't be much arguments from me or others but again it has fuck all to do with the original conversation. Their combined two titles in 12 years or so really highlights their preferential treatment as well ; )
 
HelloCity said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't think points 4 and 5 are quite right.
 
Fred_Quimby said:
"Despite some reports suggesting that City have been given assurances that the deal will be approved, BBC Sport has been told that it would still be subjected to a fair market value assessment by the Premier League board."

Dan Roan desperate to show that City didn't 'win'.
Click to expand...
That might appease the gullible masses but the reality is it will be passed .
 
Kippax Street 1880 said:
Don't understand this at all. If we are in the right we shouldn't have settled. Or do we not give a fuck about fairness so long as we get our Etihad deal approved?
Click to expand...
You are correct that you don’t understand it.

City have brought a case based on damages to their business. The premier league have done things behind the scenes which have made City happy so City have dropped the case. Presumably with regards to City’s future sponsorship deals.

That makes this good news for City.
 
thegoatsthegoat said:
Still creating a new argument, are you not bored. THE OP SAID CITY ARE SHAFTED EVERY WEEK. What has that got to do with United or Liverpool? I replied saying most fans feel the same about their club and ultimately it isn't true. If you want to create a new and different argument that Liverpool and United get favourable treatment, be my guest, there won't be much arguments from me or others but again it has fuck all to do with the original conversation. Their combined two titles in 12 years or so really highlights their preferential treatment as well ; )
Click to expand...

Yes I am bored ….
 
Didsbury Dave said:
You are correct that you don’t understand it.

City have brought a case based on damages to their business. The premier league have done things behind the scenes which have made City happy so City have dropped the case. Presumably with regards to City’s future sponsorship deals.

That makes this good news for City.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them. We should have taken it all the way. I'll believe its worked out well for us when I see the sponsorship deal announced and the charges dropped.
 
HelloCity said:
You'd have to say what the corrections were.
Click to expand...

You are right, sorry, meant to but posted early.

- We challenged the atp November version of the rules. They were ruled unlawful, but the concept of atp was deemed sound.
- we argued that meant the rules were null and void, the PL took that to mean some aspects could be tweaked and the rules remain in place.
- the second ruling confirmed the rules were null and void, and the 2021 version was what the atp rules would default to.
- the PL then reacted and passed through new APT rules, taking supposedly both findings into consideration.
- City argued the rules were still unlawful, and would go on to prove that for a 3rd time.
- City settled and agreed the new rules (post 2nd ruling but pre 3rd challenge) were valid and binding, effectively dropping/ending their challenge.

You can read into that that the club maybe got something in return to do so. You can also read into it that the rules were just fine, and the 3rd challenge might not have succeeded.
 
Coatigan said:
You are right, sorry, meant to but posted early.

- We challenged the atp November version of the rules. They were ruled unlawful, but the concept of atp was deemed sound.
- we argued that meant the rules were null and void, the PL took that to mean some aspects could be tweaked and the rules remain in place.
- the second ruling confirmed the rules were null and void, and the 2021 version was what the atp rules would default to.
- the PL then reacted and passed through new APT rules, taking supposedly both findings into consideration.
- City argued the rules were still unlawful, and would go on to prove that for a 3rd time.
- City settled and agreed the new rules (post 2nd ruling but pre 3rd challenge) were valid and binding, effectively dropping/ending their challenge.

You can read into that that the club maybe got something in return to do so. You can also read into it that the rules were just fine, and the 3rd challenge might not have succeeded.
Click to expand...

"- the PL then reacted and passed through new APT rules, taking supposedly both findings into consideration."

They did this before the 'null and void' statement from the Panel.
 
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