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

Prestwich_Blue said:
But I'm not sure I share your confidence that a government regulator could do a better job.
Click to expand...

It depends on funding obviously. But I struggle to see how it could do any worse. The entire implementation of PSR has been a shitshow from beginning to end. It's stupid strategically in terms of refusing investment in the league, it has ruined the PL's brand worldwide by accusing several of its clubs of cheating, and it has showed the utter incompetence of the PL when it comes to their ability to draft rules compatible with UK competition and public law.

Every single step they have taken on this issue has been a misstep of some kind, and the more these leaks come out like what happened in the APT case with Newcastle, the more you can plainly see that the Premier League are attempting to manage the fortunes of their most powerful clubs at the expense of others. The way they attempted to (and arguably did) directly target and fuck over Newcastle should be the story coming out of this whole mess. That's cheating. It is blatant, premeditated, unadulterated cheating that has been shown to exist in a legal arena. It's not a conspiracy theory. This isn't like us or United or someone cheating, this is the actual regulator themselves.

The PL cannot be trusted to regulate itself and while the grass may not be greener, it is worth a go because what we have now is corrupt.
 
Damocles said:
My American autocorrect says judgement so the IT overlords have ruled I'm afraid.

Mate, we've read the same things from these journalists about CAS and the like for years now, we know exactly how educated they are on these matters. I don't care if the lad is someone who chauffeured around a sports lawyer's second cousin, he'd still be vastly more qualified than these hacks based on osmosis alone. These are the people solely responsible for the "City got off on a technicality" narrative.

I'm getting away from the point here. The point that I was making is that I don't listen to sports journalists because they have no idea what they're talking about on legal issues. Not even a bit of a clue. And you can times that by a thousand in terms of what they write several hours after a 175 page technical document has come out and how that knocks on for everyone else. The only people worth listening to about legal issues are the legal community and those legally trained. You have you view and I appreciate that but from what I've read, it appears at odds with the general consensus of the legal industry who have expressed opinions. I tend to go with the general consensus in expert domains without compelling arguments. Almost all opinions fall on the "we'll see" side of the spectrum and I don't see any outside of the aforementioned sports journalists who are touting this as a large City win.

The one exception to this of course is Simon Cliff. But Simon Cliff is currently working under a legal strategy for one of the sides of the argument so not what I'd call exactly a fair source. Facts are facts and in the legal arena, facts are useless things to have. Everybody is trying to sell their interpretation of the facts that benefit them the most, and this is what I think Cliff is doing so I'll eye his proclamations with more scrutiny than professionals who are not involved in the case.

I just don't see this large City win. I'm not even sure I see this as anything but a minor event that will have little to no bearing on anything going forward. On the face of it, and this is just my opinion with all the caveats I've put above, the idea that the entire APT ruleset now needs redrafting or is currently null due to this judgment seems far fetched. It seems much more likely based on the wording that I've tried to understand that the blue pencil test will apply; they can modify these without having to completely rewrite the entire ruleset so the rules stand as is. I'd love for someone qualified enough to explain why that isn't the case and show me what I'm missing.

I'd even go one step further and argue that maybe all of the people I've quoted including yourself, the Professor and Stefan have jumped the gun a bit and we won't really know the impacts of this for a decent while yet because there's going to be meetings and redrafts and possibly tribunals and more legal action from us or other clubs and only when we've got some distance from it can we really see who "won" or "lost".

Even with all that, I'm not even sure what winning even means in this case. We own shares in the Premier League. We're a shareholder suing the board, why others want the company to fail based on that I can't really work out.
Click to expand...
Looking at the judgement I agree with this:-
-Include shareholder loans in APT rules.
-Remove the price changes from the amended APT rules.
-Allow clubs access to the transactional data.
and it's job done?
The facts that the premier league have been found to have unlawful rules and what effects the above changes have on clubs deals/finances is a separate debate.
Ham.JPG
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Great post. I'm really at a loss to understand how the PL can hope to use a simple database to regulate sponsorship values.

A company that's less well known in Western Europe (or other regions) and wants to build brand awareness in those regions, will presumably be happy to pay more for that than a company with a existing presence. And if it's a B2C brand, the sponsorship will potentially have more of an impact than if it's a brand like United's last 2 sponsors, Team Viewer or Qualcomm.

I could potentially understand Team Viewer, who are primarily a B2B brand, trying to build brand awareness but what's in it for Qualcomm?

But I'm not sure I share your confidence that a government regulator could do a better job.
Click to expand...


Whilst understanding reservations about an independent regulator, what are the viable options ?

the PL have shown they cannot be trusted
 
BobbyBoy said:
He's worked with people now employed by Slaughter & May and also Bird and Bird, both of whom work for the PL.
Click to expand...
I worked at Freshfields once upon a time, doesn’t make me a legal expert, but I know a few, all will give their various opinions especially on landmark cases, means absolutely fuck all, only the firms involved know what’s going on, let’s see how that progresses.

Anyhow, are you the person who pretended to be a spurs fan and constantly WUM on the CAS thread, if so, please fuck off.
 
Last edited:
paulchapo said:
After having the wind taken out of their sails a little with the verdict, our lovely friends in the media have regrouped today and continued with their ant City rhetoric. The best I've seen so far is we are trying to bully the other clubs lol!

Now we have been forced to take the gloves off let's start with the premier league as a starter. Then have the red cartel and their lackeys as a main course. Finally finish off with a sumptuous desert of the scumbag media and every little independent mouthpiece like Goldbridge and the rest.
Click to expand...
Works for me.
 
I'm choosing to ignore better informed, better qualified, more knowledgeable and eminently more sensible people than myself and continue to believe we've kicked the leagues arse.

I may end up disappointed, but I'll enjoy it while we can.

FWIW I don't think we were angling for the removal of APT. Just to make it fairer for all clubs.
 
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.