The UK media are terrified of the dippers and that region, that's just a fact and I told you the reason.
Difficult to talk about the last tragedy in Sheffield but why is the Hysell one airbrushed for their history?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)
- Thread starter denislawsbackheel
- Start date
Difficult to talk about the last tragedy in Sheffield but why is the Hysell one airbrushed for their history?
give it to gordon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2013
- Messages
- 17,593
- Team supported
- Manchester City
That’s the point.
Wow even the local wineo could see that's not fair
Banging the same. old. drum.
What is the point of City paying the likes of Lescott to be a City Ambassador if he doesn't really defend City?
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Banging the same. old. drum.
Needs fukin gagging and told some home truths about his own illustrious club owner ship.
The goby ****
Bluewonder
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 24 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 3,480
Banging the same. old. drum.
Why share this? We know he talks complete bollocks.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,076
Much of the comment on the present case is ignorant and ill informed and so called reputable media outlets are as bad as the most rabid fans. The case will be decided by a tribunal nominated according to regulations laid down in the constitution of the PL NOT by the High court, and unless we have read the 165 page document compiled by City's advisers (all Liverpool fans have, of course) we don't know what City's claim(s) is/are. My belief is that City believe that the APT are discriminatory because they apply a variable principle to sponsorship deals: City's deal with and "associated" party (whatever that is deemed to be) must be subject to the FMV test but Manchester United are unlikely to be hampered by any such problems with the same or any other sponsor. What is doubly depressing is the assumption that enterprises in the Gulf will automatically act as conduits for massive sums of money to be transferred to "associated" clubs. There is no evidence at all that City have been involved in such deals and I marvel at the arrogance of the PL in assuming that commercial enterprises have nothing to do other than load money into clubs. It smacks of guilty until proven innocent. The experience of this las week or so suggests that there are far more real problems with the motivation for generous sponsorship of clubs by organisations NOT being based in the Gulf than those the PL seem to worry about.
Yep. Onerous, discriminatory and unnecessary. I'm not surprised the club is challenging them.
Incoming threats to the journalists who produced that article…Spread and share this, the world needs to know la
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,076
What is the point of City paying the likes of Lescott to be a City Ambassador if he doesn't really defend City?
You can't expect him to defend the club on a complicated legal matter against a gobshite like Jordan. He shouldn't even be going on these things with him. I don't know why anybody does tbh.
Gorton_Tubster
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 16,319
- Location
- Riding the blue tidal wave.
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Client Journalism at its worst. One of the best phrases I have heard for a while. Thats what we have in this country, journos aligned to clubs.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
It's amusing when people say that City will just buy off the PL. Then they have no logical answer when you ask, why did the PL bring the charges in the first place
…So City have to give them a bung. No charges, no bungs. Do keep up with the conspiracy theories