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

[r.soleofsalford]

More tea vicar

No thanks the last one made me fart.

 

[bluwes]

None as they haven't broken any rules that were in place at the time.

Bit like a lot of the charges against City…see how it works

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I'm asking whether his incompetence helps us with the other case. I worded it badly. I agree we don't need him, but it surely hurts their case against us.

Ok I understand you point now.

Masters may well have inadvertantly helped destroy his credibility by pushing and losing the APT case.

I believe it clearly demonstrates that he has acted in bad faith towards City in his role as lackey for the redshirt cabal, and that may count heavily again the PL's charges made against us in the 115 case scenario.

It certainly cannot imo help the credibilty of their case, having demonstrated a clear and legal bias in they way they introduced the unlawful elements of APT.

I hope his spineless and biased handing of the PL's operations and rules , towards us and other clubs from the non-redshirt alliance, paints a very clear and obvious lack of any credibility or honesty. He must be sacked imo and watch as the Government implement the role of the Independent body to oversee the administration of the PL.

I believe that it must also cast an ominous shadow over the involvement of the PL and employment of the PiGMOL reps, if everything is to be viewed as truly unbaised and independent. But maybe I am just being greedy.

 

[OntarioBlue]

I hope the arena tell him he's not welcome, find somewhere else.

Even better

 

[Gray]

I guess he'll have to pay himself?

Nice one, exactly right. But why does your Club go out of its way to piss off our Club?

 

[SebastianBlue]

I won't bother linking it but Barney Ronay has come up with a very long and tedious pile of shite masquerading as an article in The Guardian. Basically we have won fuck all.

I have just read it so no one else has to and here is my professional summary (as someone with nearly two decades in data and financial analytics):

He is an embittered hack that has provided an “analysis” that may as well be a public admission of having not a clue about what is going on (but still wanting to chime in with his inane attempts at further crafting the “City are evil” narrative).

 

[burning blue soul]

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.

Let's be honest with ourselves here. They will have taken that time to consult with utd, arsenal and the dippers.
That is who runs the premier league, not masters.
They know it, masters knows it, and now the world knows it!!!

 

[Claytop]

It will surprise no one that the law expert quoted on the BBC article is an Arsenal fan, Simon Leaf.

 

[paulchapo]

They obviously did mate.
But i think that they've been told from Masters or whoever at the Premier League that there is a plan to bury us/ get rid of us with the 115 thrown at us and that nobody will find out and we'll be unable to do anything.
And also I'd like to think that we've been collecting tons of evidence over the years, just waiting for the dam to burst and fight back. The Premier League have scored one of the biggest own goals ever and we've give them enough rope to hang themselves with.

Today was their worst nightmare.

No, I hope this was just the START of their nightmares. The dream scenario is we have irrefutable evidence the cartel conspired with the premier league to stop us and later Newcastle at any cost. Add in some racism to stop the "Arabs/Gulf states" will make it even sweeter. Corruption and racism, they would be well and truly fucked.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I think upon a little reflection the extent of City’s victory depends on the club’s objectives. If it was to destroy APT (which I highly doubt) then it’s correct to say it’s somewhat limited, although still material. If it was to recalibrate the rules (which I expect it was) then the success would have to be, at the very least, characterised as highly successful.

However, what cannot be open to debate is the extent of the PL’s defeat. A de facto public authority having a finding that its rules were unlawful, as was the way they were applied, is huge. As are the findings of procedural irregularity and unfairness.

To fail to understand this is to fail to appreciate the function of an authority such as this, the laws of natural justice and the burden and standard of proof required to establish such findings.

This following from the Leicester shambles further underlines this organisation is not even close to being fit to oversee a multi-billion pound industry that has attained huge strategic and commercial importance to the UK.

That should be the story, but instead all we have is mental gymnastics from the media about how neither side won - when one of them manifestly lost.

What's even more damning is that they were told that owner loans at zero or preferential interest rates were likely to be APTs. And yet they, at the suggestion of some unnamed individual or club, chose to exclude these from the rules.

This is the real story here in my view and the media should be asking the question of who suggested excluding soft loans and why the PL listened to them.