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

[Bluearmy]

Hope you didn’t get stung.

Bed lol

Still half asleep obviously

 

[halfcenturyup]

This is all a product of the PL letting the Saudis to take over Newcastle, which they never should have been allowed to.

It’s a weird one in that I don’t agree with the PL and I don’t agree with our position on it either tbh, not in the existing climate.

These new APT rules would have happened in any case to stop City. Don't you think? They have been after sponsorship income since Mansour bought the club (at least once the club got past the first stage of accelerated spending). The initial APT rules were just brought in in a hurry when Saudi joined the party.

They should either apply the competitive bid and FMV rules to all sponsorship everywhere or just forget all this nonsense and get back to IAS definitions of RP. Imho.

 

[moomba]

We should sell TV rights to the tribunal hearing. We'd make a killing.

 

[domalino]

Not sure how that can be true since the rules were brought in as a result of the majority of the clubs voting in favour of them, unless a significant number have changed their minds?

That sounds more plausible.

I read it to mean 12 clubs have offered evidence.

Either 11 or 7 for the PL (the wording of mmore than half’ is ambiguous to me) and the rest (probably just 1/2) for city.

 

[Metal Biker]

Even if i didnt argue on twitter, it would be coming on here and reading the continuous recycled arguments, pundits/commentators going on about our investigations, the petty digs from my mates which I’ve argued about for years. Even if today’s latest legal battle reveal means City are fighting back, it’s not football.

The football season is over, what do you expect?

 

[Bluearmy]

Good sleep, honey?

Think i picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue

 

[Dodge]

Just a quick question to those who are disappointed in our club taking this action.
What would you have them do instead? Would you have them meekly accept that our commercial and sporting rivals - an executive of one of which who has apparently made, let’s be charitable here, “discriminatory noises” about our club and executive team/ownership - should also have the right to decide how much sponsorship City are allowed to have? And from whom it should come?

We have tried that for 16 years and been progressively and repeatedly slapped down by the PL. Over and over again.

What more could the club do without finally resorting to the law? How many more insults should they accept? How many more sponsorships should they see go begging on account of the PL’s blatant racism (at worst) or protectionism (at best)?

How many more times should our executive team see their efforts to build this team, this club, this deprived area of Manchester and all its’ inhabitants up to world class standards be stymied because they are too brown/too Muslim/too good at it whilst our rivals see much bigger deals being waived through on a nod, a wink, a straight arm salute?

Win or lose this action I for one am more than proud of my clubs actions today. I’m humbled by it.

We didn’t start this fight. We tried to stop it ever becoming a fight. We tried to be decent and professional about it. We failed because we were never going to be allowed to succeed.

Thst is what the law is for. And I am glad, proud, and relieved that this club, my club, our club, have finally said “Enough. This far and not one step further”

If that makes no marks and twats on social media give you a hard time, stand up and fight for your club.
They’re fighting for you.

Bang on the money mate.

 

[johnevans]

Just a quick question to those who are disappointed in our club taking this action.
What would you have them do instead? Would you have them meekly accept that our commercial and sporting rivals - an executive of one of which who has apparently made, let’s be charitable here, “discriminatory noises” about our club and executive team/ownership - should also have the right to decide how much sponsorship City are allowed to have? And from whom it should come?

We have tried that for 16 years and been progressively and repeatedly slapped down by the PL. Over and over again.

What more could the club do without finally resorting to the law? How many more insults should they accept? How many more sponsorships should they see go begging on account of the PL’s blatant racism (at worst) or protectionism (at best)?

How many more times should our executive team see their efforts to build this team, this club, this deprived area of Manchester and all its’ inhabitants up to world class standards be stymied because they are too brown/too Muslim/too good at it whilst our rivals see much bigger deals being waived through on a nod, a wink, a straight arm salute?

Win or lose this action I for one am more than proud of my clubs actions today. I’m humbled by it.

We didn’t start this fight. We tried to stop it ever becoming a fight. We tried to be decent and professional about it. We failed because we were never going to be allowed to succeed.

Thst is what the law is for. And I am glad, proud, and relieved that this club, my club, our club, have finally said “Enough. This far and not one step further”

If that makes no marks and twats on social media give you a hard time, stand up and fight for your club.
They’re fighting for you.

I can only echo the comments of others.. a really good post, summing up where we are as a club and its supporters.

Reminds me of Tomas Borge's poem 'My Personal Revenge' (modified by Jackson Browne) including the lines:

'My personal revenge will be to show you/ The kindness in the eyes of my people/ Who have always fought relentlessly in battle/ And been generous and firm in victory..'

 

[hammocity]

The problem is how transparent the Premier League have been, particularly with Newcastle. The hypocrisy is blatant and out there in the open. 'Related party' deals have always been part of football, because business people are going to find sponsors from their personal contacts. It was never an issue when Mike Ashley was doing it, because he never threatened to win anything. It's not been a problem with Bayern Munich being sponsored by companies that own shares, even when their commercial income is vastly inflated compared to similarly-sized clubs, because they were an already established club, so no-one noticed.

One that I remember was when Liverpool got taken over by an American and the next year they had the biggest shirt deal in history from Warrior; an American company that no-one had ever heard of, who could suddenly outbid Nike or Adidas, and give a record shirt deal to a team that at the time was finishing 8th. That company just happened to be owned by a personal friend of the new chairman and was swiftly taken over by New Balance, so didn't really get any benefit from the publicity.

And this is the racism that they talk about. Two American friends supporting each other's business are seen as completely above board (and why not?). A Germany company sponsoring a club they have shares in is seen as fine. Two companies that both happen to come from the UAE are automatically portrayed as related parties purely based on that fact. There's this constant narrative just below the surface that there's something murky and shady about Arab businesses.

And that my friend will be to the front of our action against the Premier League, precedent is one of the main factors when evolving laws, criminal and civil, this is no different.

Btw, I do know there's a difference between Civil and criminal precedent so I don't need the like of Domalino giving me a lecture.

 

[halfcenturyup]

That sounds more plausible.

But it's also a more serious leak. If it's one club leaking based on the request they got from the PL, that's one thing. If it's a club leaking after receiving information on the progress of the defence, that's another thing entirely.