And let's face it, if Panja doesn't write how his sources like, they stop being sources for him.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
And let's face it, if Panja doesn't write how his sources like, they stop being sources for him.
shevtheblue
Well-Known Member
The real win here is, as Stefan alludes, PL have been shown up to not being able to sail their ship themselves. They make rules on a whim at the guidance of chief competitors that favour them alone, and now those rules have been proven to be unlawful. Not sure whether the legal team will be able to use this at the 115 hearing, but if they are i'm sure they'll make good use of it to show how fucking useless and incompetent the PL really are. It also adds another string to the bow for an independent regulator for the PL, which IMO is actually not a good thing for City but probably *slightly* better than having this corrupt cunts in charge.
I thought they were offered the job two said no immediately and one quit after 6 weeks I think
And that should be a big story.
Why did they say no? Why did one quit? What was being expected of them?
It'll come out at some point, I'm sure.
Tugay One Cup
Well-Known Member
Not sure why everyone is piling on to Stefan to be honest.
Because he's a public figure, very knowledgeable and has said some stuff a lot of City fans don't want to hear.
It's that simple. Someone had a go at Steven McInerney the other day for... not knowing who Samuele Ricci was. Tolmie takes a load of shit every transfer window. Not to mention how quickly everyone turned on Ian Cheeseman around the time of the CAS verdict.
This is why bluemoon can't have nice things.
It wasn't sent to them? I doubt they would give a response to an email they haven't seen.Aren't the Premier League supposed to be giving a response to the City email today?
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Also, he conspicuously talks about our ‘rivals’ - well we all know who he’s referring to, don’t we?This was always going to happen as soon as that email became public, the press would put a negative spin on things to generate more clicks. It's what they do.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 17,856
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
That's not a pile on. If you want a pile on go and see the Russia / Ukraine thread where @Mr Kobayashi tried to have an opinion!Not sure why everyone is piling on to Stefan to be honest. It's not cut and dry, it very rarely is. City wanted the February amendments flagged as illegal and they got that but I also believe the premier league are right in that only changes are necessary to make them comply. Whether they can get those changes in is the question, I'm not convinced they can so their only option is to remove them for now. For instance the 10 day turnaround looks like it's a non starter to me, it's impossible to judge a complex sponsor within 10 days, it could take 12 months like they did with our sponsors. A limit is needed but it can't take long so it's a catch 22 situation for them.
Whatever the PL do it will weaken the rules anyway. For instance they have to give access to their databank data which is a massive win for City as they can then look at everyone else deals and actually maximise all the sponsors around that. This alone is a massive win and worth it' weight in gold to the right data analysts.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,310
I can't be bothered going back to the article. But does it say "The Tribunal said that both the original rules and the amended rules are unlawful"? (Or anything that clear?)
Both on shareholder loans and database procedures, the new ones on four of the 2024 changes.
Edit: Oh, sorry. Missed your point :)
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Because they are both cunts.Gill is regularly seen sitting next to Ferguson at Utd matches, he's the highest ranking English man at UEFA. Parry is head of the EFL and surely has some contacts still at Liverpool. What disqualifies them as good sources?