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

[supercity88]

Have you read all of the judgment. Be honest.

The end result was pretty much as I expected - main principles upheld and some meaningful but not necessarily decisive wins. Like it or not that is my objective view. You don’t need to agree but it is based on reading what was said not simply my life long football bias.

And even if you don’t agree it doesn’t change that challenges like this are very hard to win which was a point you seem to also disagree with

I think that's fair Stefan. But when you consider what City's main objectives would have been when taking the PL to court I think you can draw the conclusion that they won. Ultimately the amended rules that led to our potential sponsorships being rejected have been found unlawful and we have the opportunity to present those again and have full disclosure from the PL as to why they're not acceptable, if indeed they are able to do so. Similarly, owners ploughing in cash to their clubs interest free will now need to be assessed. The critical elements of the rules City would have been unhappy with have been found to be unlawful - that's a "win".

 

[slbsn]

Agree with that…. Be interesting to see what he thinks of the Cliff email, presume he’ll have only just seen it

I’ve read it. I’ve spent most of the last 10 years in litigation (claimant and defendant). This bad tempered fundamental disagreement is normal. It’s genuinely held but it’s also inherently one sided. That’s not a criticism- it’s a fact. I can be certain that the PL really also believe they won.

 

[mcfcphil]

Like the optimism! It could equally be the opposite tho. None of us know the evidence so it’s difficult to comment. The club seem relaxed so that’s good enough for me tho

If it’s the opposite it’s the equivalent of theatrically pushing all your chips into the middle of the poker table when you’re holding a 2 and 8.

Possible of course, but I would be staggered if that’s the approach from Khaldoon and Soriano based on advice from Pannick etc.

 

[SilvaisSkyBlue]

Have you read all of the judgment. Be honest.

The end result was pretty much as I expected - main principles upheld and some meaningful but not necessarily decisive wins. Like it or not that is my objective view. You don’t need to agree but it is based on reading what was said not simply my life long football bias.

And even if you don’t agree it doesn’t change that challenges like this are very hard to win which was a point you seem to also disagree with

Nah, you were wrong mate, nothing to worry about, it happens to all of us professionally and personally.

Doubling down is no good, best to just accept and learn from it :)

 

[daveiw01]

Right lads, here’s how you respond to the nonsense attempts to make this look like the prem had a win.

“That’s like saying City won the title but it doesn’t matter because a team beat them twice”

Bloody Brentford! Tsk

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

Have you read all of the judgment. Be honest.

The end result was pretty much as I expected - main principles upheld and some meaningful but not necessarily decisive wins. Like it or not that is my objective view. You don’t need to agree but it is based on reading what was said not simply my life long football bias.

And even if you don’t agree it doesn’t change that challenges like this are very hard to win which was a point you seem to also disagree with

So you basically disagree with the Man City club statement today that describes the Premier League announcement as misleading and inaccurate?

 

[thismeansfour]

Have you read all of the judgment. Be honest.

The end result was pretty much as I expected - main principles upheld and some meaningful but not necessarily decisive wins. Like it or not that is my objective view. You don’t need to agree but it is based on reading what was said not simply my life long football bias.

And even if you don’t agree it doesn’t change that challenges like this are very hard to win which was a point you seem to also disagree with

I haven't read it all. From what I have read the premier league have been told by a court that they are abusing their power and have tried to introduce unlawful rules which don't comply with UK law. Whilst we may not have got a slam dunk, is this the outcome the premier league was hoping for? Absolutely not, did City think they could win everything? I highly doubt it, but we come away with the result we wanted, the premier league hasn't. On that who has won? It couldn't be more black and white and whilst I appreciate you giving your reasoning to why the premier league have declared a win, you equally should be saying they haven't won, how can you be found to be acting illegally and win? We have the added bonus of being able to get emails from the premier league, something which we couldn't do in the 115 as we are the accused. City remain tight lipped on everything, we have the best minds in the world running the show. Would we have released our statement and then the next statement if it wasn't true?

 

[slbsn]

I think that's fair Stefan. But when you consider what City's main objectives would have been when taking the PL to court I think you can draw the conclusion that they won. Ultimately the amended rules that led to our potential sponsorships being rejected have been found unlawful and we have the opportunity to present those again and have full disclosure from the PL as to why they're not acceptable, if indeed they are able to do so. Similarly, owners ploughing in cash to their clubs interest free will now need to be assessed. The critical elements of the rules City would have been unhappy with have been found to be unlawful - that's a "win".

On that measure, the PL can and do also claim a win

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

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.

I've had a sound night's sleep basking in the glory of our defeat at the IC. I've tried to post GDM's superb post along with PB's because they both identify the real issues that arise from this award. It is a sad reflection that we can be certain that our emasculated and biased media will not wish to ask any of the questions you might wish to ask, but I suspect, and hope very much that Khaldoon and others at our club will with a vengeance.

 

[manimanc]

So basically the pl has been running an unlawful, deeply flawed and prejudiced business model for at least three years, even though they were warned of the consequences at the outset.

This needs a full independent investigation.

I'd say they've been running a flawed business model for more than 3 years.
I'd say they've not even changed their rules since the start of the Premier league because they didn't need to as it was the same top four year in year out and nobody had owners with an ounce of knowledge about rules or sponsors or anything like that.
These rules would have been tweaked more times than whores tit in the last 15 years because we got owners who was clued up and who was businessmen and would see through the charade of the rulebook.