Presumably @M23 Citizen approves of Martin's non 'scruffy" shirt and tie combo?’Tis but a scratch – Premier League are like Python’s Black Knight
Need help understanding the claims and counter-claims over the Manchester City verdict? Then look no further than ‘Monty Python and the Holy Grail’ …
https://archive.ph/P2Gkr#selection-1425.0-1431.149
Yes. The real problem was accepting that Newcastle were not state owned. The fund is directly controlled by the Saudi gov.While I agree with a lot of the sentiment of that, personally I think they had to do something after the Newcastle deal went through. Shouldn’t have been allowed in the first place.
(iii) also refers to the original rules so the original and amended have two reasons each.(i) refers to APT rules in their original form
(ii) & (iii) refer to the amended APT rules (i.e. after the changes were made following the Newcastle takeover).
Why not ?While I agree with a lot of the sentiment of that, personally I think they had to do something after the Newcastle deal went through. Shouldn’t have been allowed in the first place.
mine are 55 + 57 ...... you can't ever stop worrying !!Try having sons at 36, 34, and 28 you still worry about them at this age, doesn't get better.
Try having sons at 36, 34, and 28 you still worry about them at this age, doesn't get better.
I can’t see exemplary damages in this case but it depends a bit on where the PL go next.It is my fervent hope that the Tribunal is just as offended, and says so - and adds exemplary damages to any compensation to City. "The primary intent of such damages is not to remunerate the injured party but rather to punish the defendant for their conduct and deter them, and others, from engaging in similar behaviour in the future."
As it is clear that the PL brought in unlawful rules deliberately to stop Newcastle progressing, why are NUFC not putting in a claim for compensation?
Why not ?