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

[ManCitizens.]

Can I just check if my understanding of things is roughly correct?

Depending on your allegiances/agenda you can essentially cherry pick parts of the ruling to claim an overall victory in the court of public opinion. The PL "won" on some points and City on others.

PL claiming victory on the finding that the concept of FMV is lawful (though I'm not sure City disputed that?)

City claiming victory on the finding that their current implementation is unlawful.

People can argue about the spin of it on forums and twitter but what is the actual outcome and impact on clubs?

It seems that clubs who favour cash injections from related parties via sponsorship (e.g. City, Newcastle etc) will benefit as the rules around FMV are likely to be loosened and they will therefore see a boost to their p&l?

It seems clubs who favour cash injections from related parties via interest free loans are now going to have to see those rules applied evenly to them and they will therefore see a big hit to their P&L every year.

So regardless of who appears to be winning any argument online or in the press, the long and the short of it is that the ruling has a net benefit to clubs like City. We'll be making more and Arsenal will be making less?

This has always felt inevitable when rules were being made not in the name of fairness, but in the name of protecting those with a head start. Loopholes left in by design were always susceptible to challenges like this.

The Premier League have been called unlawful, unreasonable and unfair.

City can sue for damages.

The PL have called an emergency meeting (why if they’ve won?).

The current APT rules need to be changed.

How this is being spun so both sides won is completely laughable. The press are completely ignoring the fact we have previously voted in favour of APT rules, just not in the current format. I highly suspect us trying to get them thrown out completely was a legal tactic advised by our legal team, you go big not expecting to win big.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Few can afford the best legal advice but it seems even fewer follow it.

The overwhelming majority of clients follow the advice they are given, although sometimes reluctantly!

 

[mancboy]

Morning All. Apologies if this has been answered previously (quite a lot of recent posts to trawl through). I thought that @slbsn had previously felt that the ruling of the tribunal would not be published as this was a private mediation and that the only clues of any City success would be the removal and redrafting of the recent amendments to the APT rules? I see the judgement has now been formally published albeit with some redactions. Do we know why this has changed and the judgement published?

The ruling was sent to the pl and city around 2 to 3 weeks ago, it was sent to the other pl clubs yesterday, its impossible to think that one of them wouldnt have leaked it, also the ruling forced the pl to release a poorly and hastily put together face saving statement so it was always going to get out.

 

[mancboy]

The overwhelming majority of clients follow the advice they are given, although sometimes reluctantly!

Although this would ultimately depend on their reasoning for bringing the case, if there was another objective other than winning the case its not unlikely they wouldnt follow it

 

[blue b4 the moon]

After explaining to my mate that we did get a result and not lose he ended the WhatsApp chat with "don't know what you were all moaning about to win everything anyway"....it's his goto line, uses it with shit reffing decisions when he has nowhere to go with his points.

Such a shame this has been made public during an international break..... almost like it was planned that way.

 

[Keeper!]

Martin Samuels called our win yesterday a "Seismic moment for football in this country." Could it be we are just starting? What else is about to come out of the woodwork?

Masters was appointed CEO of the premier league in 2019. In the same year the four year investigation into our club began leading to us being charged in 2023. Some coincidence eh? In that period the same hard core of clubs, padded out with the likes of Burnley , Spurs and Bournemouth, have written letters to have us suspended or banned from European competition. That is clear unequivocal evidence they were colluding and working against us.

Our club has obviously been aware of all this going on and given our great resources I would be amazed if we haven't been gathering evidence against them from the very beginning for when they played their hand. Now they have and they've been smashed in the first game. An emergency meeting has been called. I would be very surprised if Khaldoon doesn't play his aces at that meeting and tell them this is just the tip of the iceberg. If they proceed with the 115 charges case what just happened will go from a bloody nose for the premier league, to being put into intensive care, from which it will never recover.

Whatever happens I hope we make them pay, financially, professionally and personally. No mercy, just as they would have shown us none. They wanted our club put out of business. I hope we do the same to theirs.

I agree with your points but why would we want to smash the PL?

We simply want an open minded , well governed league.

If we win the 115 case we will be in a place of great strength and will become one of the clubs dictating the future of the league.

 

[BringBackSwales]

That can’t really be answered with any real accuracy without knowing what City’s true objective was for the action. If it was to obliterate APT then that could quite legitimately be characterised as a ‘loss’. That’s unlikely, however, given we didn’t challenge the previous iteration of APT. Furthermore, such an outcome was objectively much less likely - and the club would doubtless been advised as such, and so would not have been expected, which goes to perception: if you don’t expect a particular outcome then not achieving it is very arguably not a ‘loss’, irrespective of your aspirations.

Have you and Lord Pannick ever been seen together at the same time?

 

[slbsn]

Morning All. Apologies if this has been answered previously (quite a lot of recent posts to trawl through). I thought that @slbsn had previously felt that the ruling of the tribunal would not be published as this was a private mediation and that the only clues of any City success would be the removal and redrafting of the recent amendments to the APT rules? I see the judgement has now been formally published albeit with some redactions. Do we know why this has changed and the judgement published?

Parties agreed it was too important not to publish

 

[cheekybids]

The overwhelming majority of clients follow the advice they are given, although sometimes reluctantly!

Why wouldn’t you?

Regulators should not be getting caught up in emotion especially when working at this level.

 

[blueste41]

The Premier League have been called unlawful, unreasonable and unfair.

City can sue for damages.

The PL have called an emergency meeting (why if they’ve won?).

The current APT rules need to be changed.

How this is being spun so both sides won is completely laughable. The press are completely ignoring the fact we have previously voted in favour of APT rules, just not in the current format. I highly suspect us trying to get them thrown out completely was a legal tactic advised by our legal team, you go big not expecting to win big.

The PL will (have I think?) argue that it's because some of the rules have been deemed illegal and therefore urgent action is needed but they will further argue that whilst their urgent they are easily solved. The test will be in the latter part....