City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

terraloon said:
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
Click to expand...

If seven clubs vote down any changes, what do the PL do?

Remember, the question was why Everton and Chelsea would vote with City now, if they are going to be hurt by interest on their loans.

What they do is vote down any rule including shareholder loans in APT. The PL can't make the rules "legal" without a 2/3 majority so they would have to scrap APT rules in their entirety or run with rules found to be anti-competitive. Bye bye APT.

Tyranny of the minority.
 
M18CTID said:
I said it earlier in this thread that I thought it was Tottenham - and no doubt Levy 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.
Click to expand...
Apologies for missing it earlier this thread has been moving along pretty quick this evening :D
 
PL have been told the current APT rules are unlawful and unfair, they have to re-write them but within the scope of lawful and fair practice, that's what the emergency meeting is for. Well, that and the compensation bomb that will come from PL TV revenue of all member clubs XD
 
Magicpole said:
I know a team that have done and keep doing that. Can I grass them up to UEFA?
Click to expand...
i
Centurions said:
"That’s what John Stuart Mill wrote about in On Liberty. The pursuit of majority interest at the expense of a minority faction. So when the PIF bought Newcastle in October 2021 and almost instantly the Premier League began adjusting its rulebook — an email on the subject to the league from a club official specifically mentioned “the Gulf region” and was dated October 12, five days after the takeover — that’s the tyranny of the majority in action. AKA: a carve-up.
And we later read that the panel believed this official when, as a witness, he or she insisted Gulf-owned clubs were not the target. They believed the assertion that this intervention could just as easily have been discussing an “American consortium who had links to lots of American companies”. Except there are already quite a few American consortiums with links to lots of American companies in the Premier League, and the email didn’t mention them. It referenced the Gulf. “The takeover of Newcastle United heightened . . . concerns again and encouraged the clubs to seek action,” the witness admitted. Even so, the same email would have been sent had the worry related to Americans. It’s just that it wasn’t. It was sent five days after a Saudi takeover."

That's from Samuel's piece in The Times today, has it ever been confirmed which club sent that email to the PL per chance?
Click to expand...
Of his own free will?
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.