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

HelloCity said:
Be aware that claims of a PL win are linked to this:

He added: "While it is true that MCFC did not succeed with every point that it ran in its legal challenge, the club did not need to prove that the APT rules are unlawful for lots of different reasons. It is enough that they are unlawful for one reason."

In reality the PL ‘wins’ were worthless because City only needed to show the rules were unlawful for a single season. That some of City’s claims of the rules being unlawful were thrown out means absolutely nothing.

Here’s an example:

Haaland has 5 one on ones with the keeper. The keeper saves 4 but Haaland scores 1. To win the game Haaland had to score just 1 of his 5 attempts. The keeper can claim he ‘won’ 4 but ultimately the game goes to Haaland.
Click to expand...
You try your luck with 100 women and get 99 knock backs. You get one say yes and you take her home. Your night was a success.
 
Dribble said:
Mmmmm... You see the issue with this is sponsorship is only valued at what someone is willing to pay. This is where everything gets murky.

I was having it with a braindead Rag today, & said to him that the PL came to the conclusion that our sponsorship level is around or below that of Everton, Villa & WHU.

I shit you not, he said those clubs have a storied histories & loyal global fanbases, with packed grounds every week & fans that will follow them everywhere, hence why the PL placed our sponsorship level beneath theirs!

Obviously I was setting a trap for him about our rejected level of sponsorship, as the details have never been revealed to my knowledge, but this illustrates the lobotomised level of dialogue City fans have to deal with in defence of our club.

Pointing out that we'd won 5 of the last 6 PLs, were reigning World Champions & former CL & UEFA Super Cup champions, & were rated by OPTA as the best football team in the world didn't matter. Everton winning the 1985 First Division title under Howard Kendall was a bigger achievement than anything we've ever managed in our history.
Click to expand...

Even with that, it’s not going to change. The only way they’ll ditch the APT rules altogether is if clubs can’t agree on a new lawful version of them and given the challenges that failed, there’s not that much they need to change. I still think they’ll find it difficult though.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
That's true but the main issue for City was the painful delay in the turgid process. If we can see the figures quickly we can make quicker decisons and move on. It is the unfair delays which caused us the most damage and the Judges agreed with us on that.
Click to expand...

Yeah agreed, interesting to see what they agree to in terms of the costs. Think this might all end up back in front of a tribunal again!
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I think there may be something in this. If you look at the APT documents it is absurd the amount of hoops we had to jump through with the sponsorships. The PL admitted they had staffing problems. The 115 case has been running at the same time (along with Chelsea, Leicester, Everton etc). They can hardly accuse us of non-coperation if they themselves have not been co-operating with us. The impression you get from reading the ATP documents is that the PL is an out-of-control shambles. They lurch from one crisis to another.
Click to expand...
They are guilty of non-cooperation in this case and we could be in the 115 case. The fact that they are guilty cannot prove our innocence, as I just said "whataboutery" doesn't work in law.
 
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.