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

The picture emerging will come as no shock to anyone who supports City. The PL has not been shown up as incompetent but as corrupt and dishonest. Emails show that the APT regulations were introduced as a direct consequence of the takeover of Newcastle by the Saudi Arabian PIP. Further they show that the PL was urged by the chairmen of "certain clubs" to introduce new measures which would make it difficult, not only for Newcastle but for any other "Gulf club" to grow financially without clearing obstacles not placed in the way of any other club. It completed the work of FFP/PSR which prevented owners investing anything more than risible amounts in their club by limiting the ability of "Gulf clubs" to make profitable sponsorship deals with Gulf companies. The PL knew what it was doing, clearly took no advice from lawyers on the enforceability of the regulations and began to wage a systematic campaign against most PL clubs. Manchester United were allowed massive allowances to offset Covid "losses" to avoid falling foul of PSR but "smaller" clubs could be hounded mercilessly. But today it all came crashing down - funnily enough because the PL apparently won a victory at their tribunal which meant their APT rules are void legally!

This could be where the PL's problems really begin - at least for those who survive. The APT rules are a dead letter and the procedure for deciding FMV has to be overhauled, if that's possible. If the PL believes seriously that the response to today's award involves only a few minor adjustments it might just find that the procedure for changing rules and/or introducing new ones is far from easy, especially as the number of clubs feeling they have been treated unfairly appears to be large enough to block any rules of which the cartel might approve. The days of a cartel and a PL in a cosy relationship could well and truly be over.
 
burning blue soul said:
I'm struggling to compute the comment of the prem "being in a much, much, better position" than if they lost all the claims against them.

That's like saying a bloke is in a much, much, better position losing only 75% of his monthly pay at the casino than losing 100% of it.

Technically, it is correct, but also he has lost 75% of his money. And in the grand scheme of things, his Mrs is not seeing the much, much, better position.

The premier league have been outed in a brutal fashion, that they clung onto a few scraps of victory is not a result for them at all. The damage to their reputation is immense, no matter how they spin it. When they lose the 115 charges soap opera the whole system will be cleared out.
Click to expand...

Another point, which may not mean much but might be relevant, is that City and PL were told on 26/09 about the findings yet it was the PL who delayed the announcement until today.

Obviously to try and find a positive spin on it. It’s taken them 12 days to come up with the sorry drivel that they’ve tried claiming today. Desperate cunts.
 
mancboy said:
Tbh i dont think money is the main concern with chelsea, they may see an opportunity where sponsorship dwarves any interest they pay
Click to expand...

If they can have that without the interest, that would be better, no? And let's not forget fair value is fair value even without the APT rules.
 
Let me get this straight.

So we stand accused of getting an unfair financial advantage by disguising something like £60m of funding as sponsorship revenue (yet to be proven).

While it turns out that half the league have been pumping hundreds of millions into their clubs through interest free loan agreements in a manner that has been found by a court of law to unfairly distort competition.

Yet because the latter was sanctioned discrimination, inserted into the rules by the Premier League itself and waved through by a majority of clubs, nobody batted an eye?

And the average fan on the street is under the impression we're the ones 'financially doping'?

Am I missing something, or is this not absolutely fucking outrageous?
 
Last edited:
Ric said:
Click to expand...

good to see, he should be going full Tonto for the PL now!¬
nota bene
"The Tribunal also made the following key decisions regarding City’s challenges to the PL handling of the EAG Transaction and the FAB Transaction:

EAG transaction: The Tribunal ruled that the Premier League’s decision on the Etihad Airways Group (EAG) Transaction was procedurally unfair. This was because the PL did not give City an opportunity to respond to the Benchmarking Analysis before making its final decision. As a result, the decision regarding this transaction was set aside. Importantly, the decision was set aside only on the grounds of procedural unfairness related to the lack of opportunity to respond.

FAB transaction: Similarly, the tribunal found that the PL’s decision regarding the First Abu Dhabi Bank (FAB) Transaction was also procedurally unfair. The PL did not provide City with the Databank transactions from other clubs, which were referenced in the Premier League Board’s Final Determination. Because this critical information was not disclosed to City prior to the final decision, the Tribunal ruled that the decision must be set aside. Again, this was solely for the reason of procedural unfairness due to the lack of access to the data.If these transactions are ultimately approved,
City may be able to claim damages if they can prove the unlawful rules caused such losses and rejections."
 
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.