Bluewonder
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 3,575
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
Gaylord du Bois
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 29,303
- Location
- Great Umbrage.
- Team supported
- Glory Hunting Blue. Was Chelsea.
Speaking with a posh lisp, no doubt.
No +1 for her on any works do’s then!
Blue_Lightsaber
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2022
- Messages
- 2,737
- Team supported
- Man City
They might have endless 115 insults but they have limited money! You don't win a war of survival by giving up. You win it by breaking the other side's will to fight.
And this was always bound to happen.
The cartel knew they couldn't compete with City on the field back in 2011 and brought in FFP/ PSR stuff to try to stop us. Then the 115.. They have nothing to hit us with except the media bullshit!
And this is not going to stop anytime soon.
BTW regarding the last sentence.. Liverpool already know they've lost and tried to sell and get out but they couldn't find a buyer at their 6B asking price!
Just relax and enjoy the ride with City!
We’re ruining football.
We’re stopping EFL clubs getting paid.
We shot JFK.
We’ve made some friends..
Matt Diablo
Well-Known Member
Fukin brilliant:)
Somebody pointed out that this should have been confidential between City and the Premier League and its members.
So somebody leaked this to the media and It backs City in the claim that some clubs have a vendetta and will do anything it takes to mud our name.
If it's true and it was leaked to the media by a club member on the Premier League board then they should be removed from their role within the Premier League. Now does this have a bearing on the hearing with the independent panel, Was it done to to throw a spanner in the works and scare the other members to vote for City.
So somebody leaked this to the media and It backs City in the claim that some clubs have a vendetta and will do anything it takes to mud our name.
If it's true and it was leaked to the media by a club member on the Premier League board then they should be removed from their role within the Premier League. Now does this have a bearing on the hearing with the independent panel, Was it done to to throw a spanner in the works and scare the other members to vote for City.
BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 28,106
Arsenal shot JFK - they play at the Library, which is, after all, a book repository!
Last edited:
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,382
Noticed both the Times and the Athletic/NYT are essentially lying about City's deals essentially being outside UEFA's old standing version of FMV. I was under the impression the PL had the same rule their version of FFP from 2013/14, but the press are talking like this is some new concept for the league which City found a problem with "because their deals are inflated see".
Is it me or are they re-using terms for different rules far too often in the PL rule sets? Any law maker at the PL, with an ounce of common sense, would have gave APT's version it's own name. To differentiate, to avoid confusion, because it is different/new. It's almost like they are working hand in hand with the press, giving them loopholes to hurl their shite like the cretinous apes they really are.
Is it me or are they re-using terms for different rules far too often in the PL rule sets? Any law maker at the PL, with an ounce of common sense, would have gave APT's version it's own name. To differentiate, to avoid confusion, because it is different/new. It's almost like they are working hand in hand with the press, giving them loopholes to hurl their shite like the cretinous apes they really are.
Last edited: