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

[Stoned Rose]

So, seeing as the consensus changes by the minute, did we fucking win or not ?????

The consensus is only changing for those who don’t understand it.

The tribunal found parts of the APT rules are unlawful.

The regulatory body for the game has written and applied rules that are unlawful. Rules designed purely to stop certain clubs getting certain sponsorships.

There is only one winner here.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

So, seeing as the consensus changes by the minute, did we fucking win or not ?????

Without a straw poll it would seem that few posters don't think we won, IE Stefan and Damocles to name but two. But it looks like the majority on here think we did win something at least. What exactly is still to be determined.

If we didn't win something, I guess the PL must be rewriting their Assoicated Party Rules and calling an emergency meeting for fun?

 

[mattcity5]

That they’re owned by PIF.

Loads of people think we're state-owned. Theyre wrong, but I can understand their confusion, it is a bit of a fine line. But why are we so bothered about a club being state owned?

Is it because potentially they'll be richer than everyone else? If so, so what. Somebody always has to be the richest, and if we're wanting to limit ownership based on that, it's a really slippy slope to being as bad as the red shirts.

What would be the worst that would happen? Newcastle sign great players and the league is even more competitive?

Any piece of regulation regarding funding is one piece of regulation too many to me.

 

[KS55]

What are the pl voting on ?

To ignore the ruling and voting to keep the illegal rules and to ignore making loans payback with interest ?

Or new rules ?

I think they’ve decided not to have a vote just yet.

 

[citizen_maine]

Khaldoon is a slightly different proposition. He is a member of the law making body of AbuDhabi (The Executive Council) and a director of some of the main companies. I suppose in the end we have to accept that many of our AD transactions will be Associated, provide the rules are fair, legal and administered without bias. Remember this category was introduced specifically to trap us and is a lot wider than Related Transactions under IAS 24 which UEFA use and to which we are subjected.

Then APT cannot be fair or administered without bias as it doesn't treat all clubs transactions the same

 

[Stockton Heath Blue]

But can we get 7 votes? 1 City 2 Newcastle 3 Chelsea 4 Everton 5 Forest. Can't think of any others tbh.

Palace - Didn't their owner recently state that he was a billionaire, but PSR didn't allow him to invest any of his fortune?

 

[spacecadet]

Palace - Didn't their owner recently state that he was a billionaire, but PSR didn't allow him to invest any of his fortune?

Hopefully, but I wouldn't bet on them Blue.

 

[SalfordCityBlue]

Without a straw poll it would seem that few posters don't think we won, IE Stefan and Damocles to name but two. But it looks like the majority on here think we did win something at least. What exactly is still to be determined.

If we didn't win something, I guess the PL must be rewriting their Assoicated Party Rules and calling an emergency meeting for fun?

It's hard because there were no rules of engagement to define a 'winner', so the more negative amongst us are defaulting to their more doom and gloomy instincts.

Might be easier to frame it as there was only one loser here, and as you say, it's the one that's being forced to take action as a result of the decision.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Without a straw poll it would seem that few posters don't think we won, IE Stefan and Damocles to name but two. But it looks like the majority on here think we did win something at least. What exactly is still to be determined.

If we didn't win something, I guess the PL must be rewriting their Assoicated Party Rules and calling an emergency meeting for fun?

Stefan and Damocles are wrong.

We proved their rules are unlawful. Which is what we set out to do.

 

[meltonblue]

Loads of people think we're state-owned. Theyre wrong, but I can understand their confusion, it is a bit of a fine line. But why are we so bothered about a club being state owned?

Is it because potentially they'll be richer than everyone else? If so, so what. Somebody always has to be the richest, and if we're wanting to limit ownership based on that, it's a really slippy slope to being as bad as the red shirts.

What would be the worst that would happen? Newcastle sign great players and the league is even more competitive?

Any piece of regulation regarding funding is one piece of regulation too many to me.

For the same reason we’re constantly saying we’re not. It brings a completely different motivation into the scenario.

I don’t disagree with your financial points though.