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

[argyle]

Wonder how we can make the argument that what we are doing is to the benefit of ALL of football?

I don't think City are doing the legal challenge because of this.

Every club is out for themselves.

 

[hammersmithlad]

View attachment 121439

Love this reference...even more so since I saw the real thing (minus Jack) in the Louvre just the other month....it is indeed a masterpiece!

 

[Manc in London]

Oh, I fully agree.

I wish the club would do more than keeping silent and just waiting to win a legal case - and then still keeping silent.

When the media lights a match to burn us down we should turn a fucking flame thrower on them.

However it's just not going to happen.

The clubs name get's dragged through the mud and they keep silent and it's fans that have to deal with it or go out of their way to ignore it.

The club's hands are tied when it comes to reacting to what is written or discussed on TV, radio and social media. Knowing the importance the club places on reputation, they will be as annoyed and as frustrated as the supporters.

 

[ballbag]

Talks port saying £900 million deal with EFL off the table if we win.

Maybe the 10 clubs that refused the deal a few months ago (Liverpool and Arsenal in there) could set the record straight about that?

Strange that journalists can't research anymore, isn't it?

From Mike Keegan on 12/03:

REVEALED: The TEN clubs who shot down the new £900m EFL deal

A growing number of Premier League clubs are considering ditching football's 'New Deal' - and taking legal action should a government regulator try to force them to pay.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Can't the monkeys at TS just do a 2 second google search and go.... actually you're talking shite.. and that's our job.


Also strange that a news article from a whopping 3 months ago has been forgotten by the whole universe, including the author of the article and the publication they write for.

 

[Plavivoice]

I read the start of Syed's article and it was such a disingenuous piece of City bingo bullshit that I really couldn't be bothered to go on. Still, even in the short extract of his text that I did see, he betrayed a woeful lack of understanding of the concepts of a 'related party' as commonly referred to in the business world and the PL's new construct of an 'associated party'.

It's embarrassing that these clowns portray themselves as worth listening to on a subject when they so clearly lack any meaningful grasp of the basics. As another example, I remember that joker Tariq Panja on X expounding on football finance and, in doing so, wrongly delineating the purpose and function of a balance sheet. I mean, what the fuck? I know this isn't the point and they're there to shill for one side, not provide an honest or authoritative view of the issues, but even so it's lamentable.

Syed has an anti City troll every week. I stopped reading it too ( along with Petrusha) Same with Ronay, Lieuw, Wilson and other assorted Grauniad cronies. Their anti City agenda extends way beyond football.

 

[Merlin's Magic]

The media can cry foul as much as they want.
They can create any theory they want.
Opposition fans can shout and name names as much as they want.
Arsenal can write all the letters that they want.
Arsenal can leak any information about us as they want.
John Henry's wife can fail at sarcasm as much as she wants.
All of the footballing world can brand us anything they want.
They can discredit all our on-pitch achievement as much as they want.

All of this noise, propaganda, agenda, discrediting means ABSOLUTE shit in the actual scheme of things.
The fight is between City and the PL.
Nobody apart from these two entities have any say whatsoever in this matter.
Anybody thinking otherwise is just a non-entity full stop.
As for us City supporters, this is a massive challenge, not of our making though.
None of this is our doing, we are just innocent bystanders.
We stuck by our club through the hellish periods dreaming of better times.
When the better days did come, we thought it's finally our time.
But, it was not allowed to be according to some certain entities.
In these times, its imperative to stick together, Unity is paramount.
The club has officially provided their side only once since the news of the charges broke.
And that statement of irrefutable evidence the club claims to have, is the only information that should be relevant to us.
All the other noise, opinions, "facts", knowledge etc is just bogus.

So fellow blues, stick TOGETHER, clear out your heads, block the external nonsense and watch City burn the jealous establishment to hell!!

 

[Keeper!]

It's not even that.

It's alright not listening and turning it off...but they have a huge audience to where their bile spills. This is what creates the hate which spreads across all platforms X/Instagram/Facebook etc.

Must be true cos' it was on the radio.

They need to be stopped.

Not a chance that happens after the events of this week, we have put out the fire with gasoline.

 

[Jam Tomorrow]

They see it. I’m convinced Parry is not in the EFL for the benefit of those clubs.

He has a desk at Klanfield, he’s the EPLs Trojan Horse there to strip money from the EFL by slashing parachute payments etc all in the name of fairness

 

[halfcenturyup]

I am sure that I am missing something here, all this talk about unlimited sponsorship and so on but surely all clubs will have to still abide by the UEFA FFP rules. In addition, what about the proposed spending cap in the PL regarding multiples of the lowest teams TV rights.

It seems we are getting shit thrown at us, basically saying we could get billion pound sponsorship deals but how would we be able to spend it anyway?

My feeling is that the ammendment proposed is going to allow the PL to retrospectively go back to existing deals and revalue them or decide themselves the value of future deals.

They can't do that, but they can look at renewals of existing sponsorships. I wouldn't be surprised if that is what they are up to with Etihad.

 

[KS55]

Unless I am missing something, section X doesn't say that the award can't be made public. It just doesn't say that it can be.

But then again, it doesn't say the award should be made available to the parties either, or that the proceedings have to be confidential.

Maybe they are standard clauses in the Tribunal Act?

Stefan was quite convinced it wouldn’t be made pubic but he didn’t say why. I don’t know!