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

[Keeper!]

Again true. But it's most likely in that case there will be some "wins" and some "losses" for both parties, the same as in this one. Then we can all fight over who "won" again :)

The only loss I expect us to have to take is non cooperation, I would be utterly shocked if we were found guilty of anything other than that.

And after some of yesterday's email "revelations" I could see the panel understanding why we did not want to cooperate.

 

[nmc]

Barney Ronay is a mendacious ****, made clear by his claims that the PL statement and ours were "notable for their contrasting tones":

The Premier League went for airy and vindicated, not angry just sad. Manchester City stuck with terse, hostile and finger-pointy.
So on the one hand we have: “The Premier League welcomes the Tribunal’s findings, which endorsed the overall objectives, framework and decision-making of the APT system.” But wait. What’s this? “The Club has succeeded with its claim: the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules have been found to be unlawful.”

He obviously missed the bit where our statement opened with:
"Manchester City Football Club thanks the distinguished members of the Arbitral Tribunal for their work and considerations and welcomes their findings."

Terse, hostile and finger-pointy, my arse! Go fuck yourself Ronay!

At least the racist **** spared us the row of grinning beards comment this time.

 

[MadchesterCity]

Whether they do or not I don't know. But there's a difference between a club's hierarchy and its fans. I've been getting dogs abuse on here (it's fine I'm thick skinned and I'm on a Man City forum after all so it's a case of Alice isn't in Kansas any more) but I'm not a representative of Arsenal Football Club I'm just a fan and have been my whole life so I think it would be cool if people could make that distinction. Making things personal isn't cool.

Yet more misinformation, it was Dorothy not Alice

Yesterday was more how do you like them apples than little red rides the hood

 

[cheekybids]

The only loss I expect us to have to take is non cooperation, I would be utterly shocked if we were found guilty of anything other than that.

And after some of yesterday's email "revelations" I could see the panel understanding why we did not want to cooperate.

I think we’ll vociferously defend the allegations that we did not cooperate & I think we should win. My only fear is arbitration seems to try & give both sides a small win.

 

[remember arthur mann]

That was my first thought reading the award. They have been applying rules that didn't comply with competition law in respect of shareholder loans since 2021. So, if there is a club that has suffered a loss through the application of these illegal rules, then surely that club has a right to compensation in the same way City does for any losses incurred as a result of their application to them. Maybe Arsenal would have breached PSR, or Brighton, maybe they should have been deducted points and just maybe the final table positions would have changed and distributions have been different?

You can't just wave a magic wand and say it's all OK from now on, surely? There must be some consequences to applying illegal rules.

It would be nice to get some compo, knowing it would come out of the rags,dippers and arse funding.

 

[Jimmieblue]

According to the BBC this morning the decision is “not a resounding victory for Manchester City”. Well, we had a few drams last night on the back of it absolutely being a resounding victory! Thanks to the legal team and all concerned.

 

[Roachy]

Wasn't there some bullshit in the summer with scruffbag Ratcliffe commenting favourably on our case and a few posters falling for it? Then we see Utd has unsurprisingly given evidence against us in support of the PL. Scum, and never forget it.

 

[Gone for a Burton]

Take the accounts of all PL clubs back to when FFP, PSR & ATP were introduced.

Apply to same scrutiny to them as has been applied to City over the same period and include the impact/benefit of shareholder loans for the relevant period.

Not sure how penalties should/could be applied ( ideas please) because multiple clubs will fail the rules.

Set the record straight....

"Once and for all" !!

 

[nmc]

That was my first thought reading the award. They have been applying rules that didn't comply with competition law in respect of shareholder loans since 2021. So, if there is a club that has suffered a loss through the application of these illegal rules, then surely that club has a right to compensation in the same way City does for any losses incurred as a result of their application to them. Maybe Arsenal would have breached PSR, or Brighton, maybe they should have been deducted points and just maybe the final table positions would have changed and distributions have been different?

You can't just wave a magic wand and say it's all OK from now on, surely? There must be some consequences to applying illegal rules.

Once again this points to the lack of integrity and professionalism at the PL. it’s okay to sweep somethings under the carpet but not others… it just depends who it is.

 

[slbsn]

If you are still here, what happened to the 2024 change in respect of burden of proof? It was mentioned in the award, but then the panel only concluded on "pricing" issues (could for would, normal market conditions and removal of evidently - all found for City) and timing issues (found for the PL), but unless I missed it, there was no conclusion on burden of proof?

Like I say, I may have missed it - I am getting old. I would have thought that would be caught up in the "increased likelihood of false positive" narrative applied to the pricing issues but I couldn't see a conclusion on that either way.

Yes within pricing...

281. We consider that we should examine together the three changes made to the pricing determination, namely the substitution of “would” for “could” together with the addition of the term “normal market conditions”, the removal of the adverb“evidently” qualifying the FMV, and the reversal of the burden of proof from the PL to the club to show that a transaction is at FMV.