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

[eboblue]

When we win we should be awarded 115 PL points to be used as we see fit over this and the next 3 seasons.

The way we're playing, I'd split to 38 per season toward the 40 point mark!

 

[halfcenturyup]

Well i think you answered your own question. 23 claims unproven is not, 23 no evidence to support. The panel will be looking for a path to navigate through, where they can give the PL what they want, with the panel keeping their integrity, should City win the 23 at a later date.
We do know the panel was corrupt, when they claimed that APT was needed, when in fact the UEFA version is already being used.

Only the wearers of the most blue-tinted glasses would say the arbitrators were corrupt for concluding APT was required when the PL put up a pretty weak defence and it wasn't challenged aggressively by the club. It's one of the mysteries of the tribunal for me, why the club didn't push the arbitrators on that point. A strategic reason has been suggested and I suppose we will find out shortly.

Fwiw, I don't think the arbitrators are trying to give the PL what it wants, I think they made the mistake of assuming the two parties could work together responsibly on a way forward, given the tribunal's findings. All imho.

And there is almost no chance of this ending up in the courts, again imho

 

[salfordbluetrue]

Only the wearers of the most blue-tinted glasses would say the arbitrators were corrupt for concluding APT was required when the PL put up a pretty weak defence and it wasn't challenged aggressively by the club. It's one of the mysteries of the tribunal for me, why the club didn't push the arbitrators on that point. A strategic reason has been suggested and I suppose we will find out shortly.

Fwiw, I don't think the arbitrators are trying to give the PL what it wants, I think they made the mistake of assuming the two parties could work together responsibly on a way forward, given the tribunal's findings. All imho.

And there is almost no chance of this ending up in the courts, again imho

Only a tint? i must have been too polite, whether it goes further depends on the PL backing down on rules, that quite clearly target owners from the Middle East. As for why City allowed it, they have just proved the PL acted illegally, it is now a case of attaching that, to their attack on owners from the Middle east. No easy task but one that can bring down the cartel.

 

[WRicko]

Only the wearers of the most blue-tinted glasses would say the arbitrators were corrupt for concluding APT was required when the PL put up a pretty weak defence and it wasn't challenged aggressively by the club. It's one of the mysteries of the tribunal for me, why the club didn't push the arbitrators on that point. A strategic reason has been suggested and I suppose we will find out shortly.

Fwiw, I don't think the arbitrators are trying to give the PL what it wants, I think they made the mistake of assuming the two parties could work together responsibly on a way forward, given the tribunal's findings. All imho.

And there is almost no chance of this ending up in the courts, again imho

Why do you say the panel being weak and in my view wrongly supporting financial restraints is still not a sign of bias or even corruption

The panel in my view wrongly accepted the reason and need and general form of financial controls when the reality is it’s a restraint of trade corruption agenda and bias within the big history American clubs

 

[halfcenturyup]

Why do you say the panel being weak and in my view wrongly supporting financial restraints is still not a sign of bias or even corruption

The panel in my view wrongly accepted the reason and need and general form of financial controls when the reality is it’s a restraint of trade corruption agenda and bias within the big history American clubs

I didn't say the arbitrators were weak. I said the PL's defence was weak but that it seems it wasn't really countered by the club. And don't forget they were never asked to consider the lawfulness of PSR.

The tribunal can only judge what is put in front of it on the topics brought before it and I don't think they were wrong to conclude APTs were a necessary part of PSR based on the evidence which seems to have been presented by the parties. Why the club didn't (seem to) counter the PL's evidence more effectively is what makes me wonder why they didn't.