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

[ComfySeats]

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.

Apologies for missing it earlier this thread has been moving along pretty quick this evening :D

 

[M18CTID]

Apologies for missing it earlier this thread has been moving along pretty quick this evening :D

Yeah, sorry - wasn’t having a pop at you for missing the post as like you say it’s a rapidly moving thread.

 

[Asa's left peg]

Shit - wasn't going to drink tonight!

 

[Brendan110_0]

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

 

[chesterbells]

We’re all wrong. According to the CAF we only won 2 sponsorship complaints, and lost everything else.

That’s the Stone/Roan version, and the one used on main bbc radio headlines (radio 4 and radio Manchester) at 6pm

 

[johnny crossan]

Judgement link - apologies if already posted

https://www.mancity.com/meta/media/wzmfdwtn/partial-final-award-p-164-redacted.pdf

 

[halfcenturyup]

3 in the morning here. Time for bed.

It's been a good day.

 

[laserblue]

How ironic that this case has demonstrated that it's the Premier League that are the cheats.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

I know a team that have done and keep doing that. Can I grass them up to UEFA?

i

"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?

Of his own free will?

 

[chris85mcfc]

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?

So United benefit from their being no restrictions on debt (plus whatever sponsorship deals they fancy), whilst Arsenal save ~£30m in interest through shareholder loans (plus whatever sponsorship deals they fancy).

Meanwhile we are debt free, have no shareholder loans, and are being hamstrung on our sponsorship deals.

You can just tell that these rules have been manipulated to account for the financial makeup of those clubs, whilst hampering clubs like us.