They believe in their position. Do they believe they will win? Don't know. But their position is completely reasonable. We’ve agreed to ask questions of the Tribunal. Let’s wait for the determination.Yes, you have answered the question before.
Here is a new one, though. If City are satisfied with the current situation, why did they make such a fuss after the initial judgment and before the vote? They seemed very sure of their view on the consequences of the judgment. Is it just bluff, bravado? I'm not sure Mansour and Khaldoon do bluff and bravado. Would Pannick recommend it for some weird legal reason?
Yes, you have answered the question before.
Here is a new one, though. If City are satisfied with the current situation, why did they make such a fuss after the initial judgment and before the vote? They seemed very sure of their view on the consequences of the judgment. Is it just bluff, bravado? I'm not sure Mansour and Khaldoon do bluff and bravado. Would Pannick recommend it for some weird legal reason?
They believe in their position. Do they believe they will win? Don't know. But their position is completely reasonable. We’ve agreed to ask questions of the Tribunal. Let’s wait for the determination.
Just because you argue something hard doesn’t mean it’s the be all and end all. Litigation is frequently attritional.
Here's mine. How is renegotiating our major sponsor deals at lower levels not a big loss? Rubbish. I think the simple difference between us is that I believe the red cartel's lawyers and client media are just out to destroy our club and you don't. Their bent APT rules were brought in when the equally bent FFP attack failed - along with the related 115 charges an existential decade-long assault on a competitor threatening their revenue streams. City is fighting for its life and on your call losing the battle- it's time to back them.There won't be big damages because they don't have big losses. City will simply renegotiate the Etihad deal at lower levels in the later years and get it approved. There was no suggestion that I could see that the Tribunal thought the PLs consideration of the facts presented was faulty - they liked the PL process. They just agreed with City that it should be quicker and City should have some data to try and convince the PL. If City use that data but it is still rejected, what is City's loss? Nil. And the new rules won't be found to be unlawful by object unless the Tribunal really believes in retrospective action on shareholder loans and the absence of transitional rules. Again, I can't see it.Last reply
Is there not the possibility of some perhaps even biggish losses for the years when city couldn’t argue with the findings and had to accept no or lower sponsorship than was actually correct had they been able to better put the case with access to the data and more right of replyThere won't be big damages because they don't have big losses. City will simply renegotiate the Etihad deal at lower levels in the later years and get it approved. There was no suggestion that I could see that the Tribunal thought the PLs consideration of the facts presented was faulty - they liked the PL process. They just agreed with City that it should be quicker and City should have some data to try and convince the PL. If City use that data but it is still rejected, what is City's loss? Nil.
And the new rules won't be found to be unlawful by object unless the Tribunal really believes in retrospective action on shareholder loans and the absence of transitional rules. Again, I can't see it.
Last reply
Not saying you are wrong but perhaps we are having to be attritional rather than win or lose with all our legal arguments,?Here's mine. How is renegotiating our major sponsor deals at lower levels not a big loss? Rubbish. I think the simple difference between us is that I believe the red cartel's lawyers and client media are just out to destroy our club and you don't. Their bent APT rules were brought in when the equally bent FFP attack failed - an existential decade-long assault on a competitor threatening their revenue streams. City is fighting for its life and on your call losing the battle- it's time to back them.
I still find it astonishing that no one is bothered about the league drafting and enforcing unlawful rules on clubs they don’t like.Not saying you are wrong but perhaps we are having to be attritional rather than win or lose with all our legal arguments,?
Certainly the PL have had to conform by obeying UK law at Panel and we have won some points recently.
In future the PL are likely to ensure legality of any changes they make for fear of City.
Progress rather than full victory.
I agree the PL hate us but at least now they respect us unlike the media who still have to learn that lesson.
Just an opinion.
Stefan, Simon Jordan, has he seen the light or has someone had a word in his jug of beer?They believe in their position. Do they believe they will win? Don't know. But their position is completely reasonable. We’ve agreed to ask questions of the Tribunal. Let’s wait for the determination.
Just because you argue something hard doesn’t mean it’s the be all and end all. Litigation is frequently attritional.
I don’t know. He does seem to share some of my big picture perspective these daysStefan, Simon Jordan, has he seen the light or has someone had a word in his jug of beer?