Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 14,421
No idea I don't find him funny at the best of times. So I don't watch him.Missed this - what did he say?
No idea I don't find him funny at the best of times. So I don't watch him.Missed this - what did he say?
Not read it but are you saying the judges who have just done this case ruled our sponsorship was over valued
have you got a link to it as I can't find one and i'd like to read all of it, one or two pages that everyone is quoting seems to brush things under the carpet somewhat
On what grounds?They ruled for both the Etihad and the FAB deal that the PL weren’t wrong to class them as above fair market value.
Yes. They agreed with the PL decison on the Etihad (EAG) deal. City had challenged the "unfair process" but we lost that particular challenge. However i think the biggest issue was the delay in the process and City were not allowed to see how the PL had arrived at the decision from using the database.Not read it but are you saying the judges who have just done this case ruled our sponsorship was over valued
Samuel was clearly briefed in advance by City and he makes the same case as contained our letter about the PL statement. Not just an opinion piece - it's the 'Authorised Version' ;-)It is not total nonsense. And people don't have to agree with it for it to have a point.
Vote against what exactly? Currently there is nothing to vote on, I think your in law is jumping to conclusions-nothing regarding a future vote has been reported on.I've been asleep and not following and this is getting hard to track. Just spoke to my in law he said he's read that 11 clubs have said they will vote against as they have owner loans...anyone heard this if so please provide the link?
Don't the PL now have to prove sponsorships are not FMV, and not the club's to argue they are?Assume they’ll provide us with the benchmarking analysis and the databank and then it’s on us to make an argument.
I doubt we’ll be able to argue they’re at FMV as a consequence of getting that to be honest, which is partly why I don’t see it as a big win on those decisions as much as others.
Maybe Stefan is the cartels favourite for the Masters post!!City have lost nothing as they had nothing to lose. The rules were already in place. The worst position that City could have been in post any judgement was the status quo remained.
As we sit here now, City are in a better position than they were previously, where as the premier league are up shit creek. The premier league rules have also been labelled unlawful, unfair and unreasonable. City can now claim for damages.
The media can spin it however they like. The simple fact is that it City who will be going to bed with smiles on their faces tonight, while Richard Masters will be having nightmares.
In the process of trying to satisfy the Red Top Mafia, the PL are killing the goose that laid the golden egg. This much is now glaringly obvious to all outside of those who stand to gain from the witch hunt against City.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.