HelloCity
Well-Known Member
State hahaha.
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
State hahaha.
He is just a redshirt stooge.
Platt Lane 59
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 1,545
Wasn't Peter Swales well in with the FA when Chairman of City ?I wonder how City would gave got on under good old PJ Swales with the present day rules
Remember Maine Road regularly getting England U-21s matches.
Was Swales Chairman of City when the Football League voted to end the equal sharing of home attendance monies ?
Seem to remember City were supporters of this big change to club's finances ?
That to me, is when the bigger clubs (including City) started to flex their muscles...
Centurions
Well-Known Member
Weren't we in the 2nd division when they changed the gate receipt rules?Wasn't Peter Swales well in with the FA when Chairman of City ?
Remember Maine Road regularly getting England U-21s matches.
Was Swales Chairman of City when the Football League voted to end the equal sharing of home attendance monies ?
Seem to remember City were supporters of this big change to club's finances ?
That to me, is when the bigger clubs (including City) started to flex their muscles...
Edit: I thought that was just the top league but maybe not.
2nd Edit :( just realised that the PL wasn't in existence then.
bluemanc16
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 464
Fred Pye would have had a quiet word with the rest of the Quality street gang in close attentionWasn't Peter Swales well in with the FA when Chairman of City ?
Remember Maine Road regularly getting England U-21s matches.
Was Swales Chairman of City when the Football League voted to end the equal sharing of home attendance monies ?
Seem to remember City were supporters of this big change to club's finances ?
That to me, is when the bigger clubs(including City) started to flex their muscles...
Yes to all of the aboveWasn't Peter Swales well in with the FA when Chairman of City ?
Remember Maine Road regularly getting England U-21s matches.
Was Swales Chairman of City when the Football League voted to end the equal sharing of home attendance monies ?
Seem to remember City were supporters of this big change to club's finances ?
That to me, is when the bigger clubs (including City) started to flex their muscles...
Kinkys Left Foot
Well-Known Member
These shitbag journalists turn this bilge out for clicks from our redshirted friends.
Otherwise why say the cases are linked then fail to link them in any way or explain the means by which one affects the other.
For any onlookers, the case for the removal of APTs is NOT at the expense of ALL regulation but simply a means to return to the legalistic IAS 24 recognised by financial institutions and other football stakeholders as the method by which "Related Parties" are established and their financial dealings with each other accounted for in the Company accounts instead of this made up nonsense the PL and the redshirt alliance have come up with to try to derail City and clip Newcastles wings before they leave the nest.
The removal of APT's has no bearing on the FFP charges as:
1. Those charges allege conduct between 2009-2018 and these new regs were established in 2024.
2. Citys sponsorship income has not been challenged as to its value as either "Related" or "None Related" in any of those FFP charges brought by the PL.
Otherwise why say the cases are linked then fail to link them in any way or explain the means by which one affects the other.
For any onlookers, the case for the removal of APTs is NOT at the expense of ALL regulation but simply a means to return to the legalistic IAS 24 recognised by financial institutions and other football stakeholders as the method by which "Related Parties" are established and their financial dealings with each other accounted for in the Company accounts instead of this made up nonsense the PL and the redshirt alliance have come up with to try to derail City and clip Newcastles wings before they leave the nest.
The removal of APT's has no bearing on the FFP charges as:
1. Those charges allege conduct between 2009-2018 and these new regs were established in 2024.
2. Citys sponsorship income has not been challenged as to its value as either "Related" or "None Related" in any of those FFP charges brought by the PL.
Last edited:
Reported as 'verdict expected soon'. In other words he has had a look on here and seen @projectriver say something about 1-3 months.
He then tried to engage his brain to write any article and it all went down hill from there.
He then tried to engage his brain to write any article and it all went down hill from there.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,356
any article that quotes keith wyness can be disregarded out of hand as complete gibberish
He was back yesterday claiming that the complete silence on the PL's case against City means that governments are now involved in the background. He is a complete fool. Silence just means the PL haven't broken their own rules for a while.
I mean yeah because someone shilling for football365 would definitely have access to inner government machinations, makes perfect sense.He was back yesterday claiming that the complete silence on the PL's case against City means that governments are now involved in the background. He is a complete fool. Silence just means the PL haven't broken their own rules for a while.