Harsh! he goes around every house to clean up the chimney on christmas eve.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
No One Understands
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2008
- Messages
- 579
Really?It won't be retrospectively applied. Any changes would apply moving forward.
That's not what the orchestrators of FFP did to city. They moved the goal posts in their sham rules every time we thought we were compliant. Then, the premiere league followed up with their joke rules that were retrospective if I recall correctly, and were not time barred. But I digress, I'll wait on the 130 verdict first.
Dannyblue52
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 170
You mean like Arsenal and the Scousers have gained an advantage with their interest free loans. Maybe these clubs should take action against them or indeed the Premier League for knowingly allowing it to happen.If we broke the rules in such a way as to gain a competitive advantage, other clubs would have a prima-facie case that they lost prize money because we broke the contract. Such action would be heard by a tribunal according to the PL rules.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,401
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 17,184
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Really?
That's not what the orchestrators of FFP did to city. They moved the goal posts in their sham rules every time we thought we were compliant. Then, the premiere league followed up with their joke rules that were retrospective if I recall correctly, and were not time barred. But I digress, I'll wait on the 130 verdict first.
Funny isn't it how gooners don't want it retrospective applied on them but are happy to apply them to City
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,401
Rag.Congratulations you have won the ‘1st time JASR has a ‘Rag’ reply’ prize. :-)
Make it two.
I think it’s coz city are a threat to red cunts and it’ll take few years for barcodes to get anywhere near that threat level .I cant be the only one who is pissed off at Newcastles stance on this, it seems to me that it was the amendments aimed to stop Newcastle that pushed us to go down the legal route. Not to say that we shouldnt have pushed it but why not Newcastle.
Yes, I was there, but he did more than stand his ground, mate.
But why run into him, Eric had the ball in his arms, Bright did not need to keep running at Eric
As I said he and Wright were at it all game, I was there the Kippax and it was close to kicking off
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 11,401
Sounds like shit stirring click bait.
1. We might not want to vote against it. The new rules might be lawful and reasonable.
2. The use of the suggestion city can “get” other clubs to do things makes it sound like we a) have that power and b) we’d openly try to influence another club’s decision making processes.
Neither of which are things.
More Machiavellian, please.
sir baconface
Well-Known Member
Probably relates to the 115.very vague one liner on sky this morning that clubs are preparing to claim damages from City - what’s that about?
They’re interviewing Ian Wright and combing RAWK for informed evidence as we speak. Already appointed Diane Abbott as Big Chief Boss Investigator.
Last edited: