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

fierydan said:
Apparently they don't need 14 votes,previous vote was 12-6 with two abstentions,vote passed.So that reads two thirds of the positive/negative votes.
If the vote had been 2-1 with 17 abstentions would the vote have been carried?
Click to expand...

Yes.

But you are right on the voting, of course. I should have said nothing will get passed if seven clubs vote against it.
 
Elbow beards said:
Other clubs, other than the cartel, should be thanking City. Luckily we had deep enough pockets to take on the Premier League and get these rules over turned. Just think how much potential money they have stopped clubs from earning. We should be lauded not sneered at.
Click to expand...
The collateral damage suffered by many clubs will be huge.

IF and its a surprising IF other clubs want to take action for damages it could destroy the foundations of the PL....and they may not wish to do that.

City's victory and the description...Unlawful...Unfair...Discriminationary...would normally be enough to result in resignations and corporate ostracisation.

However the PL has demonstrated that its not normal....and neither are City,who I hope will hold everyone to public account and scrutiny.

The blue tsunami is going to wet a lot of feet !!
 
Damanino said:
bit worried about the friends we have, 8 clubs worked with PL against us, red cartel the main enemies but the other 5 dont like us either.
then Che, New, Eve supported us, so that leaves 8 teams who might on the fence to decide which way to lean.

Spurs surprise not in the 8 in this APT case trying to throw us under the bus, but you can bet Levy happy with any negative outcome on City so I would say 9 against us, 3 with us and maybe Forest so its 9 vs 5 with 6 clubs still to decide 3 of them promoted ones, and other three some of these 6 might abstain again on any big decision like happened in past. meaning even 11-12 votes could be enough.

we deffo not have numbers to push through some rules we want to happen and its a tight thing to even stop some rules being voted we dont want.

we are really hated and many have been brainwashed about City, Newcastle and Arab owners in general. lot of owners in lesser clubs dont wanna here a promoted team having rich owners ready to invest and stay in PL for 5-10 years rather than be a club that relegates soon after promotion. Newcastle pose danger for both set of teams, they are overtaking teams fighting for 7-8-9-10. with potential to overtake 3-4-5-6th as well instead of the mainly 13-18. places they did in Ashley era.
and they rather stop us then not cement in current status quo, and happy to play second fiddle to red cartel for cosy 7th-15th places year in year out. we re asking team to have dreams and bit of risk when they dont have any ambition, dreams just pure self interest and the safe option currently available.

Newcastle currently great example of the rules in work, they would need further serious investment in the squad to really take on CL teams and continued investment for years to challenge for title every season alongside great decisions made on staff, transfer etc. but they hit a limit, certainly could not properly spent to do this, they may add Guehi which would blow most of their available limit, but in the meantime their rivals can add much more quality money spent. nothing fair about this.
Click to expand...
PB has a source that paints a different picture which is that PL staff are fed up with Masters. Once he’s gone things will calm down.
 
Damanino said:
bit worried about the friends we have, 8 clubs worked with PL against us, red cartel the main enemies but the other 5 dont like us either.
then Che, New, Eve supported us, so that leaves 8 teams who might on the fence to decide which way to lean.

Spurs surprise not in the 8 in this APT case trying to throw us under the bus, but you can bet Levy happy with any negative outcome on City so I would say 9 against us, 3 with us and maybe Forest so its 9 vs 5 with 6 clubs still to decide 3 of them promoted ones, and other three some of these 6 might abstain again on any big decision like happened in past. meaning even 11-12 votes could be enough.

we deffo not have numbers to push through some rules we want to happen and its a tight thing to even stop some rules being voted we dont want.

we are really hated and many have been brainwashed about City, Newcastle and Arab owners in general. lot of owners in lesser clubs dont wanna here a promoted team having rich owners ready to invest and stay in PL for 5-10 years rather than be a club that relegates soon after promotion. Newcastle pose danger for both set of teams, they are overtaking teams fighting for 7-8-9-10. with potential to overtake 3-4-5-6th as well instead of the mainly 13-18. places they did in Ashley era.
and they rather stop us then not cement in current status quo, and happy to play second fiddle to red cartel for cosy 7th-15th places year in year out. we re asking team to have dreams and bit of risk when they dont have any ambition, dreams just pure self interest and the safe option currently available.

Newcastle currently great example of the rules in work, they would need further serious investment in the squad to really take on CL teams and continued investment for years to challenge for title every season alongside great decisions made on staff, transfer etc. but they hit a limit, certainly could not properly spent to do this, they may add Guehi which would blow most of their available limit, but in the meantime their rivals can add much more quality money spent. nothing fair about this.
Click to expand...

Who were the 8?
 
Gaz (FMwkdsoul) said:
All sounds like easy fixes in re-writing the rule and process rather than the 'end of football' headlines cant take that long, you have a starting point just take legal advice next time.
Click to expand...
The PL were advised to include the word "evidently" in one of the APT clauses, they ignored that advice and the clause was deemed to be unlawful by the panel.
 
Damanino said:
bit worried about the friends we have, 8 clubs worked with PL against us, red cartel the main enemies but the other 5 dont like us either.
then Che, New, Eve supported us, so that leaves 8 teams who might on the fence to decide which way to lean.

Spurs surprise not in the 8 in this APT case trying to throw us under the bus, but you can bet Levy happy with any negative outcome on City so I would say 9 against us, 3 with us and maybe Forest so its 9 vs 5 with 6 clubs still to decide 3 of them promoted ones, and other three some of these 6 might abstain again on any big decision like happened in past. meaning even 11-12 votes could be enough.

we deffo not have numbers to push through some rules we want to happen and its a tight thing to even stop some rules being voted we dont want.

we are really hated and many have been brainwashed about City, Newcastle and Arab owners in general. lot of owners in lesser clubs dont wanna here a promoted team having rich owners ready to invest and stay in PL for 5-10 years rather than be a club that relegates soon after promotion. Newcastle pose danger for both set of teams, they are overtaking teams fighting for 7-8-9-10. with potential to overtake 3-4-5-6th as well instead of the mainly 13-18. places they did in Ashley era.
and they rather stop us then not cement in current status quo, and happy to play second fiddle to red cartel for cosy 7th-15th places year in year out. we re asking team to have dreams and bit of risk when they dont have any ambition, dreams just pure self interest and the safe option currently available.

Newcastle currently great example of the rules in work, they would need further serious investment in the squad to really take on CL teams and continued investment for years to challenge for title every season alongside great decisions made on staff, transfer etc. but they hit a limit, certainly could not properly spent to do this, they may add Guehi which would blow most of their available limit, but in the meantime their rivals can add much more quality money spent. nothing fair about this.
Click to expand...
Probably wishful thinking but, it seems that eyes have been opened over the past couple years with some clubs that voting with the cartel hasn't given them any advantages. The inclusion of Shareholder loans to make any new APT rules lawful will also have some clubs questioning whether it might be better to sack off APT altogether if they're close to failing PSR with loan interest included
 
KS55 said:
I think he was saying a legal challenge would be inevitable if the PL rushed the changes. I don’t think he was saying that challenge would necessarily come from City.
Click to expand...

Just speculation I suppose, but this from the BBC, for example:

"However, City's lawyers believe that it would be unfair to continue to subject previous sponsorship deals to APT rules that have now been found to be partly unlawful, while choosing not to subject previous shareholder loans to the same regulations. They may even seek an injunction to prevent the Premier League from trying to doing so."
 
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.