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

[markstephenhickey]

If I read it correctly they don’t have to and don’t need to give reasons. They could literally ban any sponsorship simply because it’s from Abu Dhabi

Really?! Fucking horrendous then really.

 

[There is a Light]

The social media morons are misreading this as City wanting to have an unfair financial advantage, when in fact, we don’t want be unfairly penalised. This is what the fools don’t get, why should we roll over and allow four clubs to be in cahoots with football’s governing bodies to restrict reasonable sponsorship that would be allowed at other clubs? They’re trying to tie weights to our feet and this is most likely linked to the ‘115’ as if we receive a footballing punishment, they want to make it as hard as possible for us ever to rise to the same position of power. It’s clear and orchestrated and all of it is linked in my eyes.

Corrupt to the core, bring on the independent regulator.

 

[applecentral]

...its all honey from here

He has opened a Hornets nest here

 

[M18CTID]

Imagine if city had hard proof that the rules were changed because they were discriminating against gulf ownership.
A leaked email perhaps. Maybe several witnesses who are no longer with those hateful 8.
We could blow the whole lid off this

Chelsea?

 

[ancoats]

How can you stop unfair sponsorship in the Premier League when SKYsports control the major broadcasting rights?
It's a closed shop and the major blocks of games are never up for auction, The Premier League could probably get a much higher deal from internet companies but refuse to open up the TV rights for auction. Is that not unfair to their clubs and stopping them from getting a better deal?

How does an unfair sponsorship work ?? If somebody in a company wants to offer you £200million more than a club that does not win titles and cups and is midtable that's fair right, Because your big news in the media money sponsorship deals come hand in hand,

Also, Liverpool and United owners are doing this with their sponsors who are linked to their owners, Just because they call themselves a major club and think they control the market and it's fair that their sponsors are market value.

Why are United still the biggest earners from TV rights with Sky and TNT when they are shit and winning fuck all in the important games on their chanels, Question on how fair is it that they always get the most game shown live is that a fair market.

We all know the smaller clubs are living in fear of losing their meal tickets, United and Liverpool control how they vote and dare vote against them, Stop voting for them because Manchester City are the new top dog and we don't want a closed shop just a fair fight, So if that involves an outside investment that is fine because the top players only want the best deals for them and come to the Premier League because Clubs have money.

 

[M18CTID]

You’re not even making an argument for why it’s unfair.

Where did I say it was unfair? Bent as fuck maybe, but I never said unfair

 

[KS55]

I think there's a complication here. If the ruling in the UK is that the rule violates competition law then it is nulll and void in England, but since competition law in England and competition law in the EU are identical it is unlikely the ECJ would not accept the decision of an English court and UEFA has a real dilemma. If the decision concerns only "associated parties" there is no problem for UEFA but if City broaden the case to find that limits on owner investment breach competition law UEFA are in real trouble.

The ECJ has already ruled that football is a special case and normal competition rules do not apply,

 

[bluelights72]

Maybe the court case is welcome to the pl as they can save face if they lose , coz they tried to win against financial doping and can walk away from the 115 with saving a bit of face.

Not my words so to speak but i think this maybe the PL and City's way of finding a way out so no losers

 

[Gundoggin]

There is a wiff of a PL leak to the Times about this . Rabin on X suggests this and I tend to agree with him . Something not quite right about it all ?

 

[manimanc]

Rag HQ aka BBC Salford aren’t even mentioning this story, surely it’s newsworthy? Or are they waiting instructions.

They won't put it up because it goes against their pro 115 charges stories they love peddling.
Fuck em.