There is overwhelming proof that the PL has been driven by bad faith. Leak after leak, public comments, multiple letters by PL Club Directors, multiple emails. Our enemies have left a huge paper trail. They have not been subtle about anything. In addition so much of the media coverage has been driven by hatred including some instances of overt racism. If this ever goes to a proper court of law we will wipe the floor with them.I wonder if our legal team, using the recently disclosed emails will punt the line that the PL’s case is driven by bad faith. If they establish that the PL will have a hard time making close run items stick.
It was a brilliant atmosphere that day.
He is a paid shill, I'm convinced of it.Haha. Just read Delaney's latest piece. Apparently it's all due to clubs being state-owned. Not the PL putting in place, at the behest of certain clubs, unlawful rules to counter a perceived threat that hadn't at the time, or has now for that matter, materialised. And nothing to do with him just releasing a(nother) book about the evils of sportswashing, I don't suppose.
I am still amazed that the tribunal accepted there was a single reason for APT rules other than to stop Newcastle and City. The evidence put before them was weak imho (PL been discussing APTs since 2018 - why then I wonder? - but no formal discussions until post-Newcastle; UEFA's charges against City - which as we know were all thrown out; and the PL's case against City - which hasn't concluded so is no indication of any reason at all to do anything, if it is why not just deduct points now? Can't get my head around any of that. Especially as the PL, I don't think, can point to a single sponsorship that has subsequently been shown to be "evidently" above fmv. As I said, the tribunal needed fewer lawyers and more accountants :)
Anyway, Delaney is a funny little fella, isn't he?
For those that want to read it without giving him a click:
There are some crackers in it.
United fans used to always brag that they only spent what they earnt - a complete lie of course if you look at their figures from 1989 when they embarked on what was, at the time, an unprecedented spending spree - yet they’ve just posted a £100m plus loss in their latest set of accounts, whereas we’re now posting profits year after year, and winning shit loads of trophies to boot.
Relatively speaking, considering the revenues at their disposal, they’re literally the worst run club on the planet.
Rehash of reporting from months ago. If City lose the 115 in any meaningful way, then it opens up the possibility of damages against us. The reason it’s cropped up again is that come the end of November (6 years since it was 1st started/known) they will be time barred from claiming (ironic), so the media is nudging them to ensure they get the claim in before they can’t.very vague one liner on sky this morning that clubs are preparing to claim damages from City - what’s that about?
Wonder which club (s) would have been heroes for challenging this rule, if we hadn't been the face of it and took point.Haha. Just read Delaney's latest piece. Apparently it's all due to clubs being state-owned. Not the PL putting in place, at the behest of certain clubs, unlawful rules to counter a perceived threat that hadn't at the time, or has now for that matter, materialised. And nothing to do with him just releasing a(nother) book about the evils of sportswashing, I don't suppose.
I am still amazed that the tribunal accepted there was a single reason for APT rules other than to stop Newcastle and City. The evidence put before them was weak imho (PL been discussing APTs since 2018 - why then I wonder? - but no formal discussions until post-Newcastle; UEFA's charges against City - which as we know were all thrown out; and the PL's case against City - which hasn't concluded so is no indication of any reason at all to do anything, if it is why not just deduct points now? Can't get my head around any of that. Especially as the PL, I don't think, can point to a single sponsorship that has subsequently been shown to be "evidently" above fmv. As I said, the tribunal needed fewer lawyers and more accountants :)
Anyway, Delaney is a funny little fella, isn't he?
For those that want to read it without giving him a click:
There are some crackers in it.
He is. You should see the positive newspaper stories City get from outside of the UK.Yes there were plenty of ruining football stories, but equally, as you say, there were plenty of positive stories. As you'd expect.
Surely Pep is box office too.
The thing is as a concept sportswashing has never worked, nobody has ever changed their opinion based on the idea that a country spends money on sport and its ludicrous to think that it has, football really does hold itself in far higher esteem than it deserves.He is a paid shill, I'm convinced of it.
Many of his reports/blogs have xenophobic (at minimum) connotations.
Suppose he has to really, as this is what his imminent book is all about.
Can't be seen to be disagreeing with a novel you've written!
and football fans tend to get the county or origin wrong when insulting ownership.. we' move country every insultThe thing is as a concept sportswashing has never worked, nobody has ever changed their opinion based on the idea that a country spends money on sport and its ludicrous to think that it has, football really does hold itself in far higher esteem than it deserves.
Thanks - assumed it would be in respect of the 115 rather than the APT caseRehash of reporting from months ago. If City lose the 115 in any meaningful way, then it opens up the possibility of damages against us. The reason it’s cropped up again is that come the end of November (6 years since it was 1st started/known) they will be time barred from claiming (ironic), so the media is nudging them to ensure they get the claim in before they can’t.
It’s also prudent financial planning by them, if they do, hedging their bets. In the same way City reluctantly joined the Superleague, because it financially made sense for the club (putting aside anything else!)