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

[cheekybids]

In their eyes they only have to come up with something the gullible public will believe. They still have the majority of the media so as the journos used to say "Why let the truth get in the way of a good story".
This could go on and on now the media continue to lie by omission.

That’s why we need to press for criminal charges.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I'm not smart enough to understand all this law stuff. If another club challenged ffp and won would the 115 go away ?

I'm not smart enough either.

For example, if the APT rules are null and void since inception because they include unlawful rules and the FFP rules null and void since inception for the same reason (two big ifs, granted) then does that mean the whole financial section of the rulebook is also null and void, or the rulebook as a whole maybe?

Not sure anybody knows the answer, but I'll tell you something, Masters didn't just cancel his golf event with a broadcast partner to send out another email.

Things are afoot, I think.

 

[cheekybids]

I have been told that the problem within BBC sport is cultural rather than led from above. It is a laddish banter culture and some key people in there just dislike City for various reasons. They also have very inexperienced staff, especially in the website team, who are easily influenced. Apparently Roan is Teflon man.

I agree it must be.

Kyle Walker has a podcast & they had series of pods on Pep’s genius so there must be freedom to create a narrative for some. There is definitely a huge difference between online to radio.

 

[halfcenturyup]

As someone pointed out the relationship between the PL, SKY and the BBC is highly incestuous. You only have to look at Mai Fyfield who painted herself as some sort of executive hero because she worked soo incredibly hard while rejecting our Ethihad sponsorship. Just look at her CV she's been an executive director at all three of them, and at some stages in her career at the same time !. It's now an all out legal war of attrition, thats until someone like the Minster of Sport or IR steps in and drains that cesspit and swamp of corruption aka as the Premier League executive.

By the way, she is a non-executive director of the PL. I am not sure what she is doing making executive decisions?

 

[Vic]

Does a mid table football club make much money though? Enough to justify that mentality?

US sports’ system, with the draft, gives all clubs an opportunity to at some point be top of the pile again, so I’m not 100% sure of your theory. Maybe it’s just a natural growth in value of the business asset that’s appealing, but accepting mid table mediocrity has always got that inherent risk that you have a bad transfer window at some point, move too many of your best assets on, and risk a shit season and get relegated and see your asset value tank?

The greater risk is a failed transfer that leads to a points deduction and relegation.

 

[Holcombe bloo]

You know what, I was lay here in the night, aching knee doing my brains in, and as usual on bluemoon to pass the time, and it started me thinking.

Why do so many clubs align themselves with the red cartel? Now, obviously before people jump in with the usual responses, take a minute and think. If you class it as taking our side or theirs, any club who sits on the red side is effectively accepting mediocrity for ever. Just be an also ran, be happy to stay in the Prem, no aspiration whatsoever that at some point there may be that crack in the door, an investor who wants to pump some money in and take the club to greater heights etc. What a fucking weird mentality. Surely these clubs top brass can see the wood from the trees, that the red cartel don’t give a fuck about any of them, they just want them to know their place, do your best and be a feeder club for us when we want to plunder your best talents.

Why not align with us? I’ve enjoyed the last 15 or so years so much, been a blue for 53 years, seen everything you could ever wish to see, I’d have no problem whatsoever to see another club rise like a phoenix and have their time in the sun.

Anyway, that’s my musings on this Saturday morning, I’ll get back to feeling sorry for myself and wanting to saw my leg off, lol.

Mate most owners don’t want to invest in a big way. Wherever they are in the food chain they don’t want sink lower. Investing owners coming in below threaten that. Hence the majority in bed with the cartel simples.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Not looking for an argument but voting for recommendations for a proposed rule change is very different from voting for the final proposal. A lot can and presumably did happen between the two votes, including two more FCAG meetings. Differing legal opinions being one, I imagine.

At no point did the club as a member shareholder vote to exclude shareholder loans from the APT rules. I can't see how that is debatable.

This is essentially the argument that DeLooney, Jordan et al cannot seem to fathom.
It’s like asking ‘should we be tougher on criminals’? ‘Yes’, say most of the country.
“Why am I being sent to prison for 25 years for being a day late paying my Road tax/1MPH over the speed limit/not paying a fine or some such.
Well, you did say that we should be tougher on criminals so you’ll just have to suck it up, I’m afraid.

 

[Dribble]

It will be but if you look back in time before FFP/ PSR we know many clubs paid players in particular off the books why was it done if there wasn’t FFP or the like?

The simple answer is that it was done to avoid duties, taxes if you like.

I do agree that on the face of it the Mancini claim makes no sense at all when you look at the numbers but the question won’t be why it was done ( if that is proven ) it will simply be did it on balance happen

City's explanation over Mancini's contract can be summed up by Mark Hughes... New brush sweeps clean.

Hughes was a Sinawatra appointment, & when Moureen replaced Mancini at Inter, City probably wanted to show their commitment & keep Roberto on a retainer with a view to him replacing Hughes.

This is probably why Hughes' departure & Bobby's arrival was so swift & clinical. There's nothing illegal with Mancini continuing with his consultancy role, after taking up the role of Manchester City Manager.

IIRC, Mancini was on a £6m per year basic before bonuses, so in terms of his wage & City's turnover, the £1.7m per year consultancy contract he signed prior to his arrival, is small change in the big scheme of things.

UEFA & the PL are STILL throwing everything at City in the hope some of the shit will stick. It now seems that City have had enough & donned the knuckle-dusters & bovver boots & declared all out war on the cartel, & not before time too!

 

[halfcenturyup]

Mate most owners don’t want to invest in a big way. Wherever they are in the food chain they don’t want sink lower. Investing owners coming in below threaten that. Hence the majority in bed with the cartel simples.

Every club votes for its own interest, which is why the PL needs a strong CEO to make sure only proposals that benefit the league as a whole get put to a vote. And what have we got? Richard fucking Masters ......

 

[pauls]

I wouldn’t trust Ziegler an inch. He believed that propaganda video a couple of years ago about Etisalat and the mystery £100m and called it the biggest scandal in football. It was plainly obvious that the video was propaganda but Z couldn’t see that and trashed us in the Times.

Wouldn't trust any of em, Lawton was complicit on a Piers Morgan show and has cosied up to the Stretford lot.
Gonna be interesting how far our tentacles go if we (God forbid) win the witchunt charade.