PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

foggy1974 said:
Didnt the premier league suppress the APT ruling until City forced their hand
Click to expand...
True actually so I don't know. I still believe we will get a time and date in advance with it being such a big case rather than it just dropping but I'm just speculating like everyone else.
 
To my mind, the likely sequence of events is:
1) Draft report on findings sent to both parties - both will probably want to keep it to select few at this stage so it is probably unlikely to leak at this point (unless it is good news for the PL as they may not be able to help themselves)
2) Parties send any comments on report - probably same likelihood of leak, i.e. low
3) Parties brief outside of the inner circle just prior to issue to the wider world - probably very likely to leak at this stage but only a day or so before actual issue
4) Issue to the wider world - popcorn all round, let the games commence

As there do not appear to be any credible leaks yet, I'm inclined to think we are either at stage 1 or not even at that stage yet.

Al of which is my own opinion based on absolutely nothing at all other than the combined musings of the Bluemoon faithful.
 
blueste41 said:
Nothing is different, it is all pure speculation. Nobody close enough to it to know anything is the type of person to drop hints.
Click to expand...

Nobody close enough to it to know anything should be the type of person to drop hints.

History suggests otherwise, although the PL does seem to have sharpened up on their confidentiality since they got their arse handed to them after the APT leak.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
halfcenturyup said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
slbsn said:
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.
Click to expand...

:) 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? :)
 
halfcenturyup said:
:) 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? :)
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
slbsn said:
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.
Click to expand...
Well we must have won it because we have two ten year deals worth north of £2 billion.
 
slbsn said:
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.
Click to expand...

The “victory” for City wasn’t in the actual APT ruling but in whatever concession was received as part of the settlement?
 
halfcenturyup said:
:) 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? :)
Click to expand...
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.
 
slbsn said:
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.
Click to expand...

Possibly, 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 :)
 
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