Nothing is different, it is all pure speculation. Nobody close enough to it to know anything is the type of person to drop hints.
think it might have been wise to ask for the obligatory pics first buddy...Im happy to fill in for you. As a fellow Blue.
The narrative wasn't controlled by the winner in the APT case. I'm still not sure we even won that given the fake narrative our media put out.
Perhaps because the rules in place today are broadly those in place before City won and actually substantially more restrictive than when City first launched the case in Jan 2024? Null and void was a good headline but always irrelevant where a new set of replacement rules was relatively simple to implement and not unlawful in principle.I still can't believe the narrative that APT was a score draw or narrow win for the club. The PL's rules were declared null and void in their entirety for an issue they knew full well to have been a problem. And then they had to come running for a settlement because they knew it may happen a second time. If that isn't a complete kick in the bollocks, I don't know what is.
I’m blindthink it might have been wise to ask for the obligatory pics first buddy...
TalkSport has a video on their YouTube regarding it with @slbsnWhat was that I must have missed it?
Perhaps because the rules in place today are broadly those in place before City won and actually substantially more restrictive than when City first launched the case in Jan 2024? Null and void was a good headline but always irrelevant where a new set of replacement rules was relatively simple to implement and not unlawful in principle.
Yes I am sure City enjoyed inflicting some pain. But outside of City, City fans and the PL legal department, not many people care or even understand the case, what was won and what was not.:) It's OK. I know you won't be agreeing with my kick in the bollocks analogy. But just to push it a little further, you kick someone in the bollocks to cause them pain and get them to reconsider what they may decide to do in the future, not to knock them out.
Of course, I get your point on the rules still being there in (largely) the same form but, still, the pain this whole thing caused to the PL's reputation, its perceived professionalism and even its authority was a big win, in my eyes. And I would have thought lawyers would have enjoyed the legal manoeuvring and the associated pain. Surely lawyers, of all people, must enjoy inflicting pain? :)
Well we must have won it because we have two ten year deals worth north of £2 billion.Yes I am sure City agreed inflicting some pain. But outside of City, City fans and the PL legal department, not many people care or even understand the case, what was won and what was not.
One wasn't an APT. The other wasn't approved because of the case (if it has been approved)Well we must have won it because we have two ten year deals worth north of £2 billion.
Yes I am sure City enjoyed inflicting some pain. But outside of City, City fans and the PL legal department, not many people care or even understand the case, what was won and what was not.
ProbablyThe “victory” for City wasn’t in the actual APT ruling but in whatever concession was received as part of the settlement?
Why was the APT regulation introduced in the first place, and why did they try to tighten the rules? Simply to control the value of our sponsorship agreements with AD, and specifically our deal with Etihad, which has been a thorn in the side of our competitors since 2011. Did they manage to block our new deal with Etihad? The answer is no. So its a big win for the Blues. You need to look at the big picture.:) It's OK. I know you won't be agreeing with my kick in the bollocks analogy. But just to push it a little further, you kick someone in the bollocks to cause them pain and get them to reconsider what they may decide to do in the future, not to knock them out.
Of course, I get your point on the rules still being there in (largely) the same form but, still, the pain this whole thing caused to the PL's reputation, its perceived professionalism and even its authority was a big win, in my eyes. And I would have thought lawyers would have enjoyed the legal manoeuvring and the associated pain. Surely lawyers, of all people, must enjoy inflicting pain? :)
Yes I am sure City enjoyed inflicting some pain. But outside of City, City fans and the PL legal department, not many people care or even understand the case, what was won and what was not.
You need to look at the big picture.
it was billed as the end of football Manchester city with audacity to question rule makers ..... they soon forgot that linePossibly, but I can't help thinking the loss of the PL's credibility and authority played a part in, for example, the embarrassing failure to close the tangible asset loophole and the consequent complete failure of the efficacy of PSR as it now is.
Once an organisation with twenty stakeholders loses its moral authority, it becomes much more difficult to implement even common-sense rules. I would imagine most people in football realise what has happened.
And I can't help thinking that, if there was any way this could have been dressed up as a reasonable result for the PL, the usual suspects in the press would have been promoting it. They all went very quiet, very quickly.
Doesn't matter, though. You have your opinion. I have mine. Everybody else can have their own :)
Over my head but isn`t , ` not unlawful in principle` suggestive that they could be used unlawfully, depending on how much you value principle.Perhaps because the rules in place today are broadly those in place before City won and actually substantially more restrictive than when City first launched the case in Jan 2024? Null and void was a good headline but always irrelevant where a new set of replacement rules was relatively simple to implement and not unlawful in principle.
If it’s announced in April, it won’t affect anything.Once the decision is out I wonder how it will affect our season. Either way I think it's going to reset the season to a degree.