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

[johnny crossan]

This rugby writing Times shill is married to Arsenal chief commercial officer Julia Slot

Man City are taking the nuclear option – the result will be anarchy

Legal challenge by Man City is a battle about cutting loose from the rules and in so doing creating a disparity that kills the Premier League as a competition

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[blue for life]

It begs the question, if as Stefan said we are very unlikely to win this case, why have the club taken it on?

He admitted though that he doesn’t have all the information or what will come out next week. He also said the restrictions could prove unlawful in which case we win

 

[mattcity5]

No, the articles all seem fairly consistent. There was a change this year with the 'associated party' bit being the changed thing. That's what is being challenged. And was done within weeks of it being voted on. It hasn't been implemented yet, it is supposed to come in from next seaon, and that's what the club are trying to stop. If they win, nothing changes. If they lose, a proposed change voted through will go ahead.

I am fairly confident in saying that btw.

Any idea who proposed that change?

 

[halfcenturyup]

Two parts is still separate and dependent on the first, but sure. That's my reading of it, could of course be wrong.

I read it as a single tribunal that sets the principle first, the considers damages, like this:



But who knows?

 

[willipp]

Excellent from Stefan as usual. Shame fans of other clubs won't be able to take it on board, but as always a very balanced, fair and well put summary that even the likes of me can understand.

 

[CC1]

Just throwing this out there, but is there a way that us losing this 'challenge' but then winning the '115' battle kind of works out well for both us and the PL?

I’d take that

 

[kippax_blueboy]

Fans are entitled to criticize the club, or at least ask questions of them or doubt them. In my opinion.
We've been defending them to the hilt for the last 8-10 years now in the face of accusation after accusation.
That's not me saying that I haven't been doing my best in defending my club the past 24 hours!
In lay mans terms, its quite hard to put a good argument favouring City in terms of yesterday's news.

We are allowed to stop and ask, why have we done this, it doesn't look good etc.

I agree and I feel the same but we have to trust our leaders at the moment. If they are trying to game the system and they will lose and then we are found guilty then the Chairman and all directors will go. Pep will go. Maybe Mansour will sell the club. This happened at Chelsea due to Putin. I will accept that but if the Chairman is right and City are clean then lets win both cases.

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

No idea how City's lawsuit will go... but all this FFP stuff is complete bullshit. It's got nothing at all to do with "fair play" and is simply in place to reinforce the status quo.

 

[dario2739]

Just throwing this out there, but is there a way that us losing this 'challenge' but then winning the '115' battle kind of works out well for both us and the PL?

Could it possibly be intended that way... could this be the PL's face-saving strategy the club agreed to?
Bring this claim and get it thrown out... making the PL look good, because they've lost the case against us and the 115 charges?!?

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

Fans are entitled to criticize the club, or at least ask questions of them or doubt them. In my opinion.
We've been defending them to the hilt for the last 8-10 years now in the face of accusation after accusation.
That's not me saying that I haven't been doing my best in defending my club the past 24 hours!
In lay mans terms, its quite hard to put a good argument favouring City in terms of yesterday's news.

We are allowed to stop and ask, why have we done this, it doesn't look good etc.

The 115 charges looks horrific if proven and the emails don't make for pretty reading out of context. I don't think this recent scuffle is here nor there in the grand scheme of things?