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

[Inter Me Nan]

Listened to Takshite just now and Townsend and Stelling are saying City have gone about this the wrong way. We should have sat our fellow club owners around the table and talked through our big concerns about the APT rules. What planet are they on lol

Ahhhh, the great legal minds of Townsend & Stelling, I'll pass.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Listened to Takshite just now and Townsend and Stelling are saying City have gone about this the wrong way. We should have sat our fellow club owners around the table and talked through our big concerns about the APT rules. What planet are they on lol

They're on the bitter shitting it planet.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Beggars belief how the Club didn't think of that before wading in with the lawyers. These commentators are on the payroll for spouting this shit as well.

I couldn’t believe what they were spouting.

 

[thismeansfour]

I couldn’t believe what they were spouting.

You can't listen to TalkSport and then complain about the content no matter how wild, you know what's coming. I listen from time to time but fully know what to expect.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Listened to Takshite just now and Townsend and Stelling are saying City have gone about this the wrong way. We should have sat our fellow club owners around the table and talked through our big concerns about the APT rules. What planet are they on lol

Scathing criticism from two idiots who know less about the topic than a tea leaf knows about the history of the East India Company.

 

[Semper aggressus]

Listened to Takshite just now and Townsend and Stelling are saying City have gone about this the wrong way. We should have sat our fellow club owners around the table and talked through our big concerns about the APT rules. What planet are they on lol

I hope those two fuckwits don’t actually believe they know better than Khaldoon about legal issues and running a business.

 

[KS55]

I'd agree that it is not widely known. I would also suggest that many of those who do know of it, do not understand it.

An issue is that the use of the word 'tyranny' may come across as aggressive to some. This is because Mill philosophy is focused heavily on individual freedom. To be fair, this kind of language has often been used in political philosophy for more than 2,000 years.

Tyranny of the majority cannot be summarised as being 'mob rule' or 'dissatisfaction with majority rule'. It is more nuanced than that. Rather, it is multi faceted. It's about protecting individual freedom, autonomy and dissenting viewpoints, and the need to have some balance between individual freedom and collective welfare 'harm principle'. To be honest, that explanation does not do it justice.

The use of the term is unlikely to be simply about, "we don't like majority rule".
Based on the facts that I knowing nothing about our submission and very little about our grievance, I would guess that tyranny of the majority is referenced because we are more widely dissatisfied with governance process.

You cannot have a media manager go through the submission and click on the thesauras function and change the word 'tyranny' as that would lead to a different meaning altogether. Our submission was likely put together by an experienced KC. Having dealt with QCs/KCs over the years, who are most likely not as good as those commissioned by the club, I would trust the reasoning behind the use of the phrase.

I think the phrase is entirely apt and describes well the state of play in the PL.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Scathing criticism from two idiots who knows less about the topic than a tea leaf knows about the history of the East India Company.

I’m sure the likes of the rags would be sympathetic to our cause and would love to sit at a table when it’s resulted in them ending up being a billion in debt to not get anywhere near City. What fucking planet do these pundits live on?

 

[Manc in London]

Thanks Manc in London. I thought it would be more nuanced, especially when considered alongside the Prem’s two thirds voting requirement. Otherwise the corollary would be, for example, people continuing to anrgue about Brexit even if two thirds of voters had asked to leave. (I voted remain btw before this starts a riot lol).

I’ve also worked with some of the top chambers in the Country, in a previous working life, and the Barristers may well have tweaked the odd phrase rather than getting battered by the Court of Public Opinion. I hope I’m wrong and that this phrase (possible argument depending on the text) is a winner for the Blues.

I am just happy to see the first 10,000 word paper I wrote at university has been of use lol

I am not sure the statement will be a winner. I think it more likely a useful catch all phrase.

I don't know about amending submissions but I would have thought it was produced and shared by City and the barristers on the basis of it not being published. Another sign that that there actors in the PL who do not act in good faith. Likely supporting our view of the tyranny of the majority :)

 

[CC1]

Listened to Takshite just now and Townsend and Stelling are saying City have gone about this the wrong way. We should have sat our fellow club owners around the table and talked through our big concerns about the APT rules. What planet are they on lol

Shows how little they know or understand