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

[halfcenturyup]

They are in the main ATP judgement documents. It was part of the evidence. There is a link somewhere from the PL website with their initial press release.

Here it is: All 175 pages. Obviously the English press have ignored it!

https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/10/07/898efab9-9f51-449b-a393-1a0c05b48824/Manchester-City-and-Premier-League-Partial-Final-Award-071024.pdf

The email from the Brighton exec? Or did I miss some?

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

The PL are investigating Mancini's perfectly legal contract from 2008....four years before FFP was introduced. It was independently signed off by audits of our accounts multiple times, agreed with the UK tax office, and UEFA were happy with it. Going back into our perfectly legal accounts from 15 years ago looks pretty retrospective (and vindictive) to me.

It’s a hit and hope by the PL, there is no psr fail here. Only charge is acting bad faith, who was the bad faith too the PL? It’s more hiding from Inter that Mancini was working with City so he wouldn’t lose any money from his exit at Inter.

Image rights on players was available for Uefa to go after as it wasn’t time barred. Why is it ok with Uefa but the PL has an issue with it? Once again another hit and hope.

Then the main body of it all the Etihad and Etisalat sponsorship. At CAS witness testimonies from Etihad, Etisalat and City were all given, have all those people who gave evidence no perjured themselves?

All in all it’s desperate stuff from the PL, they’ve pissed away a lot of money over four years trying to investigate this. Their loss against City in the associated parties hearing gives me no confidence that the PL will win this hearing with their comical way of operating. Like everyone else on here it pisses me off that they have been allowed to operate how they do to smear the achievements of a club that has won historical four back to back league titles with a treble in the middle of it.

 

[Eebo]

What do the BBC mean by "partly unlawful." Nothing can be "partly unlawful."

The BBC have a way of watering things down.

What they actually meant to say was;

"Unlawful, unlawful, unlawful, unfair, unfair, unreasonable, unreasonable. The seven conclusions of the arbitration panel governing Manchester City’s case against the Premier League make for sobering reading."

The BBC are now worse than useless.

I don't know who said it but it really sums them up...

If one person says it's raining and another says it is not, then their job is not to report both sides views equally but to look out the window and report whether or not it is fucking raining!

Both sides of an argument being given equal weight is pathetic journalism and has contributed hugely to Brexit, the Farage Riots and having 5 Fascist reform MP's in the House of Commons today.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Like most of us at the time, they probably didn't expect it to incur a points deduction

Which is a good reason why Forest should never vote in favour of any PL resolution again until Masters is gone and the FFP rules are changed. Who, on God's green earth, writes rules saying the penalty for a breach can be a fine, a points deduction, squad limitations, relegation or anything else a panel can think of? It's not so hard to set out penalties for each type of breach with different severities. Even UEFA can do it. If you breach UEFA FFP, you know what the sanction will be up front, more or less.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Premier League’s ‘big hitters’ set for talks over fallout from City ruling

Premier League’s most senior powerbrokers planning to attend emergency meeting in London to discuss consequences of bitter legal battle with Manchester City

www.thetimes.com

Coward who's too scared to be named.

 

[Goatmeal]

Teams are not going to back city.
They will vote for what’s best for them. Not city or the red cartel.
Getting rid of city would be beneficial for the usual suspects who want to win the league or get into top 4.
Unless the rules restrict them (Newcastle, Villa)
When the teams lower down see how much the court cases are costing the PL. they will realise it will be paid in part by some of their piece of the cake.
Particularly if we go for £180m for loss income because of unlawful rules.
Then there could be damages for the bad press re 115
So that would be a tasty sum that the likes of wolves, Ipswich, palace etc . Even if it were just £15-20m each
The rules should be scrapped
Debt should be set at a limit or there would be transfer ban.
Restricting spend would only mean the top players would go to Saudi

 

[Blueknows]

Was it not UEFA who awarded England an extra CL place, based on club performances in CL, amongst other things? Seems unlikely we could appoint extra places ourselves

Gill and co ?Who also put forward dropping a play off for 4th place and a reorganising of coefficients for cl qualifying , funny how there's been so many changes to the CL since we qualified for it , pot seedings and tv group scheduling other examples

 

[OntarioBlue]

Just got an email from the supporters club attaching a request from Kevin Parker that we all sign a petition to force Masters to resign.

Why is he doing this ? What exactly is getting rid of Masters going to achieve. He’s not the policy maker, he’s just the mouthpiece of the owners.
And besides, isn’t this just provocation on Parker’s part. We’ve just won a major victory, let’s just wait for the dust to settle a bit before provoking even more negativity towards us.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

View attachment 134654

Premier League’s ‘big hitters’ set for talks over fallout from City ruling

Premier League’s most senior powerbrokers planning to attend emergency meeting in London to discuss consequences of bitter legal battle with Manchester City

www.thetimes.com

Coward who's too scared to be named.

Or, the ‘journalist’ involved has made it up….
Whilst not specific to this headline, always remember Betteridge’s law of headlines.
"Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

 

[halfcenturyup]

View attachment 134654

Premier League’s ‘big hitters’ set for talks over fallout from City ruling

Premier League’s most senior powerbrokers planning to attend emergency meeting in London to discuss consequences of bitter legal battle with Manchester City

www.thetimes.com

Coward who's too scared to be named.

At least that article is honest enough to say:

"Clubs who gave evidence on the Premier League’s behalf in the hearing that took place in June were said to be deeply concerned by what they view as City’s aggressive approach."

So that's the three from the red cartel, Spurs, West Ham and, possibly, Brighton. Hardly as described in other articles.