I was watching BBC news and the first thing on sports was womens cricketThe BBC online story does not carry a single comment from the Judges' 165-page report and totally ignores the crucial summing up by the Judges at the end. It is bizarre
I was watching BBC news and the first thing on sports was womens cricketThe BBC online story does not carry a single comment from the Judges' 165-page report and totally ignores the crucial summing up by the Judges at the end. It is bizarre
Well bugger me, never heard of the ****.Look up Arsenal’s CEO…
Well deserved ;)That's the joke, won best joke at the Edinburgh fringe a couple of years ago...'my old hoover just sits in the corner gathering dust"
Yup! The way the PL have been told to amend the rules puts ArseAnal in particular in the firing line.But when you look at the aim of each side, there has been only one winner. And the fallout from this, because of the verdict, is going to be a fucking nightmare for the PL. What clubs will vote for amended rules that, whilst lawful, cause them an issue?
Just ask them why they did not report any of the Judges' comments or any evidence from the 165-page report. The story is not the reaction from City and the PL claiming victory. The story is the evidence in the Judges' report. The Judges said the PL repeatedly acted unlawfuly and unfairly.A BBC complaint is forming in my brain - suggestions welcome
Unbelievably the BBC are currently trying to spin this judgement as a partial victory for the PL in order to appease their redshirt audience demographic. Sport Editor Roan is an integrity-free zone who should be sacked immediately. The whole FFP/PSR stitch up has now been publicly exposed as simply the US cartel club majority trying to protect their revenue streams through illegal constraints on competition. They have combined this blatant cheating with a decade long vile racist propaganda campaign via parasite media excusing their failure to invest or compete on the field by trying to damage City's reputation and undermine its fantastic success in both areas.
I said it earlier in this thread that I thought it was Tottenham - and no doubt Levy if that is indeed the case - as that’s what I seem to recall at the time. I could be wrong of course but I’m sure Spurs were cited in the media as being the ones who were driving a change in the rules immediately following the takeover of Newcastle.do we have an idea of who the unnamed person was who emailed the PL on behalf of his and 10 other clubs?
I may be being thick here but i don't understand why this person is given anonymity
View attachment 134287
They won’t maintain the rules as currently in place nor do I think they will scrap APT . We simply don’t know on what basis the clubs that gave evidence on behalf of City were unhappy with it could be as simple as wanting a fully transparent assessment process as to what was in place.
That said of course 7 clubs can block APT but the evidence is that previously when it came to a vote the majority were content with the principle of APT assessment