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

[Academica]

I wonder if City are expecting something in particular to come from the 115 charges case, that goes against us. 'Yeah we know you're innocent but we are going to find you guilty anyway' sort of thing?

I think it's more of the case win or lose the 115 , do we want the red cartel to say if we can or can't have certain sponsors

 

[M18CTID]

Red scouse fans being offended on Everton and forrest fans behalf????

I am sure if we are challenging the prems financial rules it also helps all these clubs that are being punished for having money and notnbeimg able to spend it.

so no suprise the scousers are the ones moaning

Liverpool fans should be on our side. After all, they have a lot of money too and aren’t able to spend it. Granted, it’s a bit different in their instance as their owners are too fucking tight!

 

[Cobwebcat]

Premier League may face legal action from club over third-party rules

The Premier League may face a new legal challenge from one of its own clubs after approving new rules related to third-party transactions

www.theguardian.com

NOT really new information….Just confirmation.

This was all known in February. Note…”including by removing personal liability for directors involved in striking such deals”

 

[malg]

snivel and spitty had their say yet

It will 100% be them saying this is a diversionary tactic to get around the 115 charges. That will be the new 'line'.

 

[Kinkybyname]

I think it's more of the case win or lose the 115 , do we want the red cartel to say if we can or can't have certain sponsors

125? did I miss a meeting?

 

[OB1]

I think it is convienient that we are raising this at a time when the breaches are ongoing.

However, what may have happened is that we have signed commercial deals or at least had them in place and they have been stopped or challanged by the PL. If this is the case then given we did not agree with the rules being introduced we are quite right to raise this as an issue.

Correct.

 

[domalino]

I don't think that is the case. I don't think they have been in place the last 3 years.

I am more then happy tp be wrong. But from menory it is only this year that the rules, voted on in principle some 3 years ago, became formalised and there indeed was a reaction to this around the start of the year.

Not something I have to hand or follow intrinsically enough mind you, just going off a loose recollection I have at this point.

I also don’t have the regs to hand but I do specifically remember they came into effect immediately because (presumably) the point was to stop Newcastle before that first transfer window in Jan 2022.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

I found the comment below quite interesting.

What if this guy is a senior club executive of one of the clubs who were given the opportunity to Vet the appointment of Masters.

They accuse rival clubs of “discrimination against Gulf ownership”, citing the comments of one particular senior club executive.

I would imagine that the club would have to provide evidence of this, and if we have it then it could be quite damaging.

In their claim, City are seeking “damages for the losses which it has incurred as a result of the unlawfulness of the FMV [fair market value] rules”, in particular for costs resulting from delays, sums they claim were not paid under agreed deals and additional costs, including the club’s inability to generate revenue from delayed or cancelled projects. This, clubs believe, could potentially amount to tens of millions.
Interesting comments regarding discrimination.
City also claim the FMV rules are intended to be discriminatory towards clubs with ties to the Gulf region.
They say rivals were seeking to limit deals from companies in the Gulf region, citing a quote from a senior executive from another club.
They claim the rules were “deliberately intended to stifle commercial freedoms of particular clubs in particular circumstances, and thus to restrict economic competition”.

To make these allegations City must have a huge volume of evidence that shows our commercial rivals acting in bad faith.

 

[Academica]

125? did I miss a meeting?

125 surely it's 115.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Feels to me like we are trying to take out the bottom few cards from the shoddy house of cards upon which the 115 charges rest. Win this and they will all come falling down, lose and we may be in trouble. I imagine the legal brains we've hired have calculated that we'll win.