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

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I'm not getting involved in his qualifications, just scanned the LinkedIn profile you shared, I'll leave it for people that know about that stuff to judge. All I was interested in was who he knows. All the people he worked with at Solesbury went straight into employment elsewhere, including the founding partner who heads up UK Athletics.

But tif, he didn’t. I think that’s material and worthy of note.

I think the notion that he eschewed a career at a Magic Circle firm in order to pursue a career in the noble profession of journalism, despite the huge gulf in earnings, is fanciful at best.

I think it’s safe to assume that it’s likely that if he was any good then he’d still be practising in sports law, especially as he plainly is engaged by the subject matter.

And fair play to him btw. He’s apparently found something he’s better suited to.

 

[flb]

That it was found that any part of the APT rules or practices were unlawful is all that matters.

That it was found that interest free shareholders loans are unlawful could end up being huge for the league and very impactful for a few clubs.

Whether we lost many of the other things we took them to court on is neither here nor there really. The main thing is that we’ve made the PL look like a dodgy, secretive, underhand and untrustworthy organisation of shysters who have brought in unlawful rules and allowed unlawful practices to go on that benefits or lets off some clubs and not others.

It’s not about a 11:9 win either way, or even 17:3 against.

People are slowly but surely discovering that the PL are not fit to run the top league in this country. That’s where we’ve won.

You know the tide is turning when Joe 90 on talksport mentions the word cartel.

 

[M23 Citizen]

Masters was chosen because the first 3 candidates turned it down ! The pl were running out of candidates.

Didn’t one of them take the job and then sack it off almost immediately because she thought what came with it was not what she wanted to be involved in?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I'm not getting involved in his qualifications, just scanned the LinkedIn profile you shared, I'll leave it for people that know about that stuff to judge. All I was interested in was who he knows. All the people he worked with at Solesbury went straight into employment elsewhere, including the founding partner who heads up UK Athletics.

So a spurs fan who is no longer interested having attempted to deflect the topic.

Very spursy , one might think.

 

[WRicko]

Perfectly plausible. My question would be…do we like that behaviour? I’m delighted that we have had a win in the APT case but I wish we didn’t continually push these AD deals to a point where they can and are being challenged.

Let’s say what you’ve suggested is true and we complete the deal(s) now. What happens if/when the rules are updated and “evidently” or something to that effect is reinstated in the rules and our deal is then deemed to be evidently above FMV?

I don’t think we will complete the deals till
the new APT rules are in place or APT is abolished

 

[AirbagsOptionalTheReturn]

So the media is getting what they want out of this and that's smearing our name, I have just lost it with my boss who wanted to talk about this ruling and started out by saying "city had broken the APT rules and had to prove that they hadn't and that this ruling shows that they didn't", he stated he had read the BBC and Telegraph coverage of this and that's what he garnered from their "coverage". I explained, after calming down, that we challenged the amendments, we had not broken any rules and that we had actually potentially lost 2 sponsorship deals because of this and that we could sue. The look on his face was delightful. He then started harping on about the charges, to which I basically told him to go and read the charges before bringing that up as if he is basing his views on the media then its completely inaccurate.

 

[SilvaisSkyBlue]

Based on what? The analysis was from leading sports law silks and partners. What do you know that they don't?

Based on its literally hearsay, it states an unnamed legal source and then states most would say they would wait and see, he states in the headline find out who won the APT case, and then provides zero answer to his headline.

This case will set a precedent whichever way it pans out, but that article is pure hearsay bollocks.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Does he explain why City think the APT rules are now void?

He suggested one KC said it was to do with:

"what is known as the “blue pencil test,” namely can a blue line be put through the offending sentences to fix them according to the tribunal’s decision and not fundamentally change the rules in the process. In other words, are the three points on which City won enough to invalidate the entire APT rules.

Clearly City will argue that they are. Given that these three points appear not to affect the purpose of the rules and are, according to the League, easily fixable, this may be an uphill battle. Some of the lawyers we spoke to disagreed with City’s view. Others didn’t offer an opinion, saying that it will be a judgement call. This could well be a matter for a further hearing. It is likely that the tribunal will decide itself whether it or the clubs should make this call".

 

[mrbelfry]

The email to the clubs said Cliff would also send something to the PL, iirc.

Ha can imagine Cliff would want to write that in crayon and include lots of pictures. On the face of it he looks like he's wrong to me so I sincerely hope he isn't going to end up with egg on his face.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I don’t think we will complete the deals till
the new APT rules are in place or APT is abolished

Will we be able to claim compensation due to the further delays in activating the sponsorship ?