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

[cheekybids]

That's a completely different argument, he is self made and respect to him for that.

I respect him for it & if he paid tax on his uk assets I’d respect him more.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Sorry mate not seen relevant info, so who is conducting this hearing then?

A panel of three arbitrators selected from the PL's Judicial Panel (the same list of professionals used to create the 115 independent panel) but in this case one chosen by the PL, one by the club and the chairman chosen by the two others.

If you remember, the three panel members for the 115 were chosen by the PL.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Well its being reported on ssn this morning by 2 tabloid pundits (one was winter, the other i think they said his name was cross?)

It was the latter i only caught saying everyone needs to stand against city for good of the game

 

[Centurions]

A panel of three arbitrators selected from the PL's Judicial Panel (the same list of professionals used to create the 115 independent panel) but in this case one chosen by the PL, one by the club and the chairman chosen by the two others.

If you remember, the three panel members for the 115 were chosen by the PL.

That sounds fucking insane when looked at in isolation.

 

[Centurions]

Well its being reported on ssn this morning by 2 tabloid pundits (one was winter, the other i think they said his name was cross?)

It was the latter i only caught saying everyone needs to stand against city for good of the game

Cross from The Sun. The narrative is being set.

Edit: it's John Cross from The Mirror, my bad.

 

[mancboy]

I certainly hope so and I believe these comments have been uttered by some of our adversaries

there is literally a public picture of the chairmen of liverpool, arsenal and united having dinner very publicly and while it is far from against the law to have dinner with business associates it would be difficult to argue against some level of collusion between them.

 

[PPT]

Well its being reported on ssn this morning by 2 tabloid pundits (one was winter, the other i think they said his name was cross?)

It was the latter i only caught saying everyone needs to stand against city for good of the game

We are now the pariah’s of football. That is for sure.

 

[mayo31]

Makes us look greedy and dismissive of the league as a whole.At the same time they are defending the 115 charges too, so I’m sure greater minds than mine are behind this, but it won’t win us any popularity contests.Also, if unlimited spending prevails, we risk turning premier league into La Ligurian or SPL !Not sure how I feel on this.

Popularity contest? It’s football, I dislike every other club. Fuck them

Unlimited spending blah blah, you sound like someone who remembers the past as a glorious time

Was it bollocks, Utd spent what the fuck they wanted as did others. Their history is built on it

I want City, if they could to destroy it all if I’m honest

I could live with us being the last winners of the PL as it is now, last 4 times

 

[kippax_blueboy]

Been busy this week and have no time to plough through 120-odd pages on this. I may therefore be duplicating stuff that's been said before, in whioch case I'm sorry. Anyway, here goes.

1. The bottom line is that this is going to be a highly technical case that depends on very complex intricacies of UK competition law. Such cases are usually very difficult for a claimant to prove.

2. However, I'm surprised and not a little disappointed to see various prominent City accounts on X wading in a criticising the club based on the reporting of this issue so far.

3. For a start, nearly all of what we know about the matter is based on a story that a newspaper has sourced based on an extensive leak from our opponent or from a rival member club within it. That constitutes a bad-faith source which is deliberately giving a skewed, incomplete and likely misleading view of events, so I'd wager that City's position would look more ostensibly reasonable if we had an impartial account produced in good faith of the respective positions of the parties.

4. Further, I think that the senior executives of the club deserve our trust at this point. That could change as events progress, though I hope and believe it won't. However, I don't see grounds at this stage for any committed Blue to mistrust them.

5. For City to have brought this action, those running the club must believe the following two things among others: (a) that City have suffered a genuine loss as a result of the PL applying the provisions we're challenging; and (b) that such application has been discriminatory.

6. IF the two circumstances listed in point 5 were true (and please note that this is a conditional sentence, while also referring back to point 4), it'd be perfectly reasonable for the club to seek to safeguard its position in this way. Indeed, there's a strong argument that the directors would be remiss if they failed to do so.

I don't see that it's currently possible to say any more than the above with any authority. But, as with the thread on the so-called '115 charges', where literally almost nothing of note has happened in public since February 2023, BM is nonetheless likely to amass thousands of pages of comment.

Do you think City bring a legal case against the Premier League in any way will force a comprimise with the Premier League dropping the charges. No side will want to lose and if both sides lose then it could be catastophic for the Premier League.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Cross from The Sun. The narrative is being set.

Cheers for clearing up who and where he works....

Yep, no chance this story is not spun to make us out as the villians again and the arbitors for all thats wrong in the game

I just pray we take them to the cleaners once and for all