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

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

Is it just me that finds it a bit strange, that lot's of media/leak's all use the same phrase of "some succeses"?

From the shill Ziegler weeks ago, all the way to Tolmie's utd source, with a good few in between.

Almost like it's been briefed that it's the phrase to use if mentioning it

We could have won but only on a technicality.

 

[wolviedinho]

Why are they all using the same phrase?

It seems very strange, that different people all use the same terminology.

Of course they could all be copying each other but that seems a bit of a stretch, using the exact same phrase.

What's a con job, regards recent reports about this case, because I'd love to know.

You said it yourself mate. Copy and paste.

Regurgitating turds.

No independent research or thought goes into the #breaking news. It’s a race to the click bait bottom and it’s live -:)

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

Barnes and Owen were desperate to stay, it was unforgivable what Alison did at the time.

And Swales promised that if Peter Barnes left he'd sign two to replace him! Perhaps we were allowed 12 in our team! Then the player "we wouldn't be able to believe" was Shinton. Too right, Peter!

 

[journolud]

More like two legal consecutive wins for us would cause the league to implode.

If we come out of the 115 trial unscathed a lot of question and I would imagine inquiries will start, and the answers will be very interesting.

Can’t call ourselves a big club until we’ve had three consecutive wins. Oh hang on, including CAS that might be so.

Can’t call ourselves a big club till we’ve beaten the Supreme Court

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

Hell, man I would relish that!

I've missed most of these jokes but I'm doing my best to ketch up.

 

[give it to gordon]

What puzzles me is why 'smaller' clubs voted for ffp. Surely that makes their club less inviting to a new owner or investor.

 

[failsworthblueboy]

I think we have won, and the phrase "some success" is just another Media twist, if you are re-writing a rule or altering a statement there will be words that can still be left in the re-written law or statement, eg: and, the, if, when, etc.
So it can never be a 100% success and I suspect the usual suspects are playing on this.
Could be wrong but that's how I'm seeing it.

 

[Whether or not]

As City fans we all want a clear unambiguous result confirming the extent to which this challenge has been successful. But, in some ways the expectation that the Premier League, who almost daily demonstrate breathtaking incompetence, would have planned how they might react to a defeat is not realistic. Pulling the vote from the agenda smacks to me of ‘oh shit, we never thought we might lose, what do we do now, quick change the agenda’. Masters is probably staring blankly at the wall, waiting for Khaldoon to tell him what happens next.

 

[skiddypants]

I wonder if thr narrative of "some success" relating to the clubs challenge is similar to the narrative of "minor breach" when the Rags were fined for breaking rules written to protect them which they helped to write?

So is it true that the rags have been proven as cheats?

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

What puzzles me is why 'smaller' clubs voted for ffp. Surely that makes their club less inviting to a new owner or investor.

It makes me wonder how much undue influence is placed upon their chairmen by the cartel. Ie the bullies suggesting that voting with the enemy( City ) is not a good idea ?

Or perhaps the money received for being a member is too good to risk losing by creating enemies ?

It certainly isn't due to common sense if I understand anything at all about their insidious ffp and supposed benefits.