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

[eyalluvitt]

That Samuel's article is fecking damming. There has to be some fallout.
Can today get any better, I might not need viagra tonight;-)

 

[BigJoe#1]

Big Statement

The Premier League blocked a major sponsorship deal that Manchester City had lined up WOW This is now deemed unlawful and wrong,

Manchester City are going to have them over a barrel

Now this is SQUEAKY BUM TIME...... BIG TIME!!

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

On sky?.She's one horrible scouse loving ****.

It’s a good 17 mins of viewing just now. Firstly about us, then onto how shit rags are.

 

[bluwes]

What does this mean?

City had no problem with the original APT rules. They claimed the later amendments were unlawful and have been proved correct

 

[burning blue soul]

I know it has been posted in the thread, but I just wanted to give it another direct link to the article (rather than the archive link) so that clicks and engagement could be driven to Samuel’s excellent content for those with access.

These outlets only really care about what content drives the most ad revenue and so we should be very selective about which links we share. But I think, even if it gives The Times some revenue they could use to beat City with later, this is content that should be supported and amplified by blues.

Seismic verdict for football that leaves financial rules in tatters​

The Premier League overplayed its hand and now the whole concept of PSR is in the bin. Man City’s legal victory could have huge consequences for some clubs​

Seismic verdict for football that leaves financial rules in tatters

The Premier League overplayed its hand and now the whole concept of PSR is in the bin. Man City’s legal victory could have huge consequences for some clubs

www.thetimes.com

Can somebody do that archive thingymabob so I can read it, please.

 

[bladdered]

I think I picked the wrong day to give up drinking...

 

[west didsblue]

City “failed” in our challenge to the PL’s APT rules and enforcement actions the same way we “failed” in our UEFA FFP case: only idiots that can’t/won’t read and people that ignore reality for their own aims believe that nonsense.

I read it as we provided a whole lot of reasons why we believed the rules were unlawful. The fact that the panel agreed with some of the reasons means the rules are unlawful. The fact they didn’t agree with every reason doesn’t make the rules a bit lawful. They’re unlawful full stop.

It’s like saying a disallowed goal wasn’t offside but it was only disallowed because of a foul on the keeper. It doesn’t make it a part goal.

 

[N1985]

Jesus, the fucking world's going to implode when we get found not guilty on the 115 isn't it.

Going through all this shit because the old guard really didn't want the new boys taking over, which is basically what the last 16 years boils down to. FFP, PSR blah blah blah. Wasn't a fucking problem on the 30th August 2008 was it.

They fucking shat their pants when little old City dropped a fucking wedge on Robinho.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Just checking out twatter and seen someone saying Pep might be on way soon to Abu Dhabi to sign a 2 year extension!?

 

[eyalluvitt]

SSN: We are going to start with a partial victory for Manchester City

Like Fulham at home was a partial victory?