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

[blueste41]

I’ve just checked the author, Christian Smith, out on LinkedIn.

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/christian-smith-5345a9121?

His only practical experience in the UK was as an associate for three years for a sports law firm called Solesbury Gay Limited, that ceased operating whilst he was there and whose licence to practise was revoked the month afterwards, following which he appears to have decided to engage in a career in journalism. It’s not clear why their licence was revoked, but at best I would suggest it was because they were unable to generate enough work to meet their regulatory obligations, at worst because of matters of professional misconduct. If they been moved on as a going concern then I wouldn’t expect to see a revocation, especially so promptly. SRA link here:

Register of licensed bodies - Solesbury Gay Limited 648998

Solesbury Gay Limited - 648998, Linstead House, 9 , Disraeli Road, , Putney, London, , SW15 2DR

www.sra.org.uk

He didn’t attain his legal qualifications in the UK (New Zealand) and whilst that of itself isn’t a bar to having a successful legal career in this country, it’s certainly a worthwhile factor to consider when taken in conjunction with someone’s career achievements.

So, based on the foregoing I would say he has insufficient real and practical experience on the subject matter to hold a legal opinion that should be given any meaningful weight. The extent of his practical legal experience was as an associate for a firm that failed, following which he decided to switch careers.

That will have entailed a huge reduction in his potential earnings. Not holding that against anyone, but it is perfectly reasonable to take that into account when evaluating what weight to attach to an article where he offers his opinion on a finding of law and its implications. It’s perfectly reasonable to conclude that if his opinions and analysis were worthwhile then he’d still be in practice. And he’s not.

So his assessment may not be biased, but personally speaking, in the context of being invited to give it any weight, I don’t think it’s worth a wank.

Having read the article and compared it to the "overall conclusions" on pages 160-162 of the judges documents I think it's a fair summary. It's honestly not difficult for even a layman to read the conclusions and come to an informed decision of where City won and lost IMO.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Some of the responses to Stefan have been beyond ridiculous. I've not always agreed with what he says by a long chalk but then he's coming from the viewpoint of a lawyer first and foremost and I'm looking at it as a Blue only. I can only think that the worst culprits (calling him outright a **** for instance) are posted by either intellectually sub-par individuals or 12 year olds (or both).

It's been pretty embarrassing, but he's a big boy. He can handle it.

And he is a lawyer. He must have been called worse :)

 

[give it to gordon]

If you compare Masters and Al Mubarak's CVs and experience as strategic leaders the kindest thing you can say about Masters is he's somewhat overmatched. Indeed I presume he was partly selected for his pliability and the ease with which certain clubs felt they could manage him but ultimately that kind of thing backfires. I don't claim to know City's end game but there must be some PL clubs looking at the current situation and wondering if we might not be seeing a changing of the guard.

Despite the red shirts wishes, ultimately nothing lasts for ever and they'll always be someone or something smarter and bigger than you comes along. It's like our second favourite manager in the league has told us..."Eras come to an end".

Masters was chosen because the first 3 candidates turned it down ! The pl were running out of candidates.

 

[Academica]

Idiotic response.
Talksport give me no guidance what to say and would LOVE me to say the most extreme things imaginable.

I was a bit pissed off with your segment on talk sport yesterday. It was all celebratory on here and then you bring us all back down to earth. Having read most of this thread, but not the finding of the tribunal. I understand that you are giving an opinion based on your knowledge and experience. I think most of the forum (myself included) greatly appreciate your input. What we need on here is honest answers to questions about legal jargon that goes over most of our heads. We need the truth even if it's not always what we want to hear. Keep up the good work.

PS. we did win really didn't we.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Haha, we're trying to run the league, that is funny!


The point about APT is interesting though, seems to be confusion about the structure altogether now. Quite clear that it won't be a quick fix at an emergency meeting that the PL is hoping for.

This was always going to happen as soon as that email became public, the press would put a negative spin on things to generate more clicks. It's what they do.

 

[blueste41]

I've listened to Stefan a number of times, but didn't catch the most recent appearance, as I dont listen to TS as much as I used to. Despite me disagreeing with his stance on whether City came out as overall winners in their challenge in the APT rules, this is just a minor difference of opinion and the proof of the pudding will be in the final judgement and implications for the league in general. That said, it is clearly very good to have someone providing balance on a show which has clearly had it in for us from the start.

I like the debate on this forum and most definitely his contributions. It makes you think outside the box, which perhaps we all need at times to stop us becoming too blinkered.

This! The reality of who won and lost will be clear once we see the changes/scrapping of the rules and the effects it has on football finances. I don't really see the point of endlessly debating it prior to that.

 

[mrbelfry]

The podcast price needs amending to FMV...

I'm not paying more for it #buyacoffee

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Having read the article and compared it to the "overall conclusions" on pages 160-162 of the judges documents I think it's a fair summary. It's honestly not difficult for even a layman to read the conclusions and come to an informed decision of where City won and lost IMO.

I don’t especially disagree with your analysis of the article. My point was in response to Damo suggesting that the author had some particular authority to opine on the subject when his CV suggests otherwise.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Masters was chosen because the first 3 candidates turned it down ! The pl were running out of candidates.

Did the first three candidates not get through the vetting process carried out by LFC and Utd?

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

Just listened to you on the 93:20 podcast now I understand what you have been saying and thanks for an excellent explanation of things
I would urge everyone to try and listen, especially those who have a negative view of Stefan. I know it’s behind the paywall but I would like to suggest to you, Stefan, that you ask Ahsan to make it available free

100% concur with this.

A brilliant aside to the factual stuff was his view on Cliff's email and linking it speculatively to the 115 case. All very positive. I'll let someone else explain...