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

[No One Understands]

It won't be retrospectively applied. Any changes would apply moving forward.

Really?
That's not what the orchestrators of FFP did to city. They moved the goal posts in their sham rules every time we thought we were compliant. Then, the premiere league followed up with their joke rules that were retrospective if I recall correctly, and were not time barred. But I digress, I'll wait on the 130 verdict first.

 

[Dannyblue52]

If we broke the rules in such a way as to gain a competitive advantage, other clubs would have a prima-facie case that they lost prize money because we broke the contract. Such action would be heard by a tribunal according to the PL rules.

You mean like Arsenal and the Scousers have gained an advantage with their interest free loans. Maybe these clubs should take action against them or indeed the Premier League for knowingly allowing it to happen.

 

[halfcenturyup]

They have been reading Bluemoon!

 

[give it to gordon]

Really?
That's not what the orchestrators of FFP did to city. They moved the goal posts in their sham rules every time we thought we were compliant. Then, the premiere league followed up with their joke rules that were retrospective if I recall correctly, and were not time barred. But I digress, I'll wait on the 130 verdict first.

Funny isn't it how gooners don't want it retrospective applied on them but are happy to apply them to City

 

[halfcenturyup]

Congratulations you have won the ‘1st time JASR has a ‘Rag’ reply’ prize. :-)

Rag.

Make it two.

 

[ufo]

I cant be the only one who is pissed off at Newcastles stance on this, it seems to me that it was the amendments aimed to stop Newcastle that pushed us to go down the legal route. Not to say that we shouldnt have pushed it but why not Newcastle.

I think it’s coz city are a threat to red cunts and it’ll take few years for barcodes to get anywhere near that threat level .

 

[ancoats]

Yes, I was there, but he did more than stand his ground, mate.

But why run into him, Eric had the ball in his arms, Bright did not need to keep running at Eric
As I said he and Wright were at it all game, I was there the Kippax and it was close to kicking off

 

[halfcenturyup]

Sounds like shit stirring click bait.

1. We might not want to vote against it. The new rules might be lawful and reasonable.

2. The use of the suggestion city can “get” other clubs to do things makes it sound like we a) have that power and b) we’d openly try to influence another club’s decision making processes.

Neither of which are things.

More Machiavellian, please.

 

[sir baconface]

very vague one liner on sky this morning that clubs are preparing to claim damages from City - what’s that about?

Probably relates to the 115.

They’re interviewing Ian Wright and combing RAWK for informed evidence as we speak. Already appointed Diane Abbott as Big Chief Boss Investigator.

 

[KS55]

You mean like Arsenal and the Scousers have gained an advantage with their interest free loans. Maybe these clubs should take action against them or indeed the Premier League for knowingly allowing it to happen.

Those loans were not against the rules then.